Veterans Affairs Committee on Oct. 20th, 2009

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Yes, sir, I have a couple of things.

It's called a living charter for a reason, to assist them in their lives to move forward. But one thing the charter doesn't address is what happens when they're about to die. Right now the Perley, Camp Hill, and Colonel Belcher institutions are available for World War II and Korean overseas veterans only. Those who served in the Suez crisis or the Cuban missile crisis are now in their seventies. There's no hospital care for them. They fall under the general provincial guidelines. Is that correct?

[Darragh Mogan]

Well, yes and no. The yes is that they are residents of the province and have insured care, as do the veterans in Colonel Belcher.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

But right now, if I'm a World War II overseas veteran, I can go to Camp Hill and the federal government pays for it. But if I served as a modern-day veteran in the Suez and am 70 years old and need hospital care, I can't go to Camp Hill, so I go to a general nursing home or something, and it's paid for by the province, not the federal government.

[Darragh Mogan]

Well, if the care is needed for the pension disability, it's paid for by the federal government.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Okay, and if it's not...?

[Darragh Mogan]

If it's not, it's part of the insurance system that a person has as a resident of a province.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

This is something that's going to come down the pipe. Within 10 to 15 years, most of our World War II and Korean veterans will be gone. What's going to happen to those beds in the future? Personally, I'd like to see what are called centres of excellence across the country, where the living charter goes all the way through to and including the death of the individual, where the permanent care for that person and their spouse is provided under the federal government guidelines and not put onto the provincial guidelines. But that's a topic for another day.

You said they get 75% of their pension. If a guy's making $50,000 and he's injured and is on a disability award, he can get 75% of his earnings until he's 65. That means around $37,500 a year for that person. What happens at age 65?

[Brian Ferguson]

At age 65, then like the rest of Canada he has his old age pension and other means. For these individuals, an amount equal to 2% of their earnings over that time is paid to them as a lump sum, in order to recognize the fact that they weren't contributing to any kind of RRSP; that's the other provision.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

At 65 that's all terminated, isn't that right? Then he goes on regular Canada Pension Plan, etc., and so in many cases he actually could end up with less income when he turns 65. Is that correct?

[Brian Ferguson]

I would assume that would be true.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

You see, therein lies another problem. Age 65 is the last point at which you should be losing any income whatsoever, as in the old SISIP plan, under which it was clawed back. This is a problem that many veterans have. When you're 30, you don't think about this, but when you turn 65 and see that deduction, it's going to hurt. This is something that I would hope we as a committee could address; that the payment go to the person till death, not till age 65. This is something I will be recommending to the committee that we look at.

I know there's a cost factor, and Darragh, you're right: there will have to be legislative changes in the House. We understand that. But I don't think that because you turn 65 it should stop. No one, I believe, after serving their country, should lose income at 65, in this particular case. It's no reflection upon you; it's just the way it works. It's something we need to change.

I thank you for coming today and look forward to working with you and the committee in improving this charter all the way through, and also that of the RCMP. Thank you.

[Brian Ferguson]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Stoffer.

I'll just take another cruise around the room.

It doesn't seem that there are any other questions.

I have one, and depending on your answer, it would be one that I certainly hope we investigate.

With the charter, if there's a catastrophic injury and the lump sum payment is made, is there any other resource that the CF member or their family has for ongoing income?

[Brian Ferguson]

It depends on the extent of the catastrophic injury. If it's so severe that they're totally incapacitated and that judgment is made, then the earnings loss would be there for good, until age 65.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Without giving too much detail, for privacy reasons, take a situation in which someone was injured and is a quadriplegic, has children, and of course has the payout—and that has helped them significantly—but there are still 40 more years of family obligation. The spouse is tied up being a caregiver, and they have no other access to income. That's a concern for me.

[Brian Ferguson]

I know we can't discuss it here, but if we could follow up with you on that particular case, we'd be delighted to do so.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Yes.

[Darragh Mogan]

There is a lot that can be done in addition to providing income support. They would get full treatment under the public service health plan. Their kids would get treatment coverage. We could provide counselling to the spouse and to the children. Under the VIP we can provide all manner of home adaptations and home improvements that an individual needs, especially a quadriplegic. There's a lot that can be done.

[Brian Ferguson]

And we don't know whether the door is closed on the income or not.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

My concern is if this is beyond a specific case.... And of course, being in theatre of combat, injuries happen more often than we'd like. For a young family that has children, in particular, it's a long time for them to go without any additional resources.

Monsieur André.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

I have two main questions.

Generally, I find that the Veterans Charter still offers a range of services—health services, psychosocial services and so on—for people who need them.

However, I find there is one weakness, even though there are many services for veterans and they are managed by a large federal institution. People who live in remote rural communities often use services in their community because they sometimes have to travel very far to obtain services. Their first reaction is to look for services in their community. However, in cases of post-traumatic stress or other psychological disorders, for example—because physically, it is always easier to get care, for a sore arm, for instance—they do not always have the resources and specialists to meet their needs.

What are you doing at the Department of Veterans Affairs to raise awareness among stakeholders in rural communities, to train specialists who are familiar with problems related to veterans? We often hear veterans say they need a veteran to help them, that is, someone who has been through the same experience. What are you doing on that front?

And to quickly conclude, a second question. Actually, it is more of a request. We have debated the issue. Mr. Stoffer and I have talked about it. The issue is the role of the services provided by the federal government relative to the services provided by the provinces and by Quebec, and the division of tax revenue to cover those services. Do you have any documents that give a detailed explanation of this type of situation, for example, a person who is 65 years old, lives in a rural area and is receiving long-term care? Do you have any documents you could submit to this committee that would explain this type of situation?

[Brian Ferguson]

We'll provide you with that documentation, sir.

On the first point, and Darragh may want add a few other points to it, we are making considerable efforts because we recognize the issue of rural access, particularly to psychological counselling and support. One of the things we're doing with our operational stress injury clinics is that many of them, if not all of them, are building in tele-mental-health capacities. It is working quite well where it's been tried out, in terms of rural New Brunswick and Newfoundland connecting into the Fredericton clinic. They've been doing it, I think, in Alberta. We've had extensive discussions with certain provinces about connecting into their telehealth network so that we can do more that way. A lot of these rural areas are never going to have a lot of capacity, but we can do it through other means. So we're looking very hard at that issue.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you very much, Mr. André and Mr. Ferguson.

Mr. Mogan, did you have something to add?

Thank you very much for your fulsome answers. It's always good to have you here. I look forward to seeing you again.

We will now go in camera for committee business.

[Proceedings continue in camera]