Veterans Affairs Committee on Feb. 23rd, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

We have Colonel Jean-Michel Verney with us today, but I want to go over a couple of things before the colonel gives his testimony and we get into questioning.

We have some committee business to do, and so we will suspend questioning at 5:10 p.m.

For those who are new to our committee today, you'll find this committee tends to be more conciliatory and less constrained than other committees.

I would like to remind members that the time limit is on the questioner, the member of Parliament, and not on the witness. So when we are in the different rounds, the minutes assigned will be consumed by those questions and, of course, the witness simultaneously. Once the time has expired, the witness can continue to answer, but we'll then move on to the next member and party.

Madam O'Neill-Gordon.

[Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, Conservative, Miramichi, NB]

I know I'm running late, but I had another meeting.

I'm just wondering if the briefing notes could be given to us sooner, because I didn't have a chance to read them since we got them this morning; I just didn't have much of a chance. I skimmed over them, but that's about it. This is important information that we're getting, and I'm a new kid on the block as well, and I need a little more time. I really think most people would need some more time to read the notes, and so I'm just asking if this would be possible further on.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

I'll ask the researcher.

[Michel Rossignol, Committee Researcher]

It depends on when the meeting is confirmed. Sometimes there's only short notice before it's confirmed, and that explains in part why the briefing notes are sometimes given the day of the meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

The research staff has said they'll do their best to do that.

Particularly with a study like this that has been adopted from the previous Parliament and that we are continuing with, I would obviously take any input from members to suspend the meeting and to move it to the next day if the members feel they can't get to the meeting prepared.

The researcher has told me that the summary of the testimony from the previous Parliament, which we need for our comparative study, should be available to us later this week, hopefully by Wednesday. But if not, it should be available by the end of the week. So by then we'll have a lot more detail for those of you here today who did not participate in that Parliament. Of course, Monsieur Gaudet has a distinct advantage because he was here for the 39th Parliament and was part of that study.

[Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, Conservative, Miramichi, NB]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Is there anything urgent before we get to the witness, ladies and gentlemen?

Then we're grateful to have Colonel Jean-Michel Verney with us, the defence attaché from the embassy of France.

Colonel, we'll allow you to give some opening remarks and then we'll rotate between the different parties for their questions for you. Then you'll have an opportunity to answer those at your behest.

[Col Jean-Michel Verney, Defence Attaché, Embassy of France]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ladies and gentlemen members of the committee, I am at once very pleased to appear before you this afternoon and somewhat moved because this is the first time that I get to speak before such a distinguished assembly.

I would like to give you a brief overview of my career path. I was trained as a fighter pilot. Having participated in a number of theatres of operations, I myself am a veteran. I should know everything about veterans' affairs, but I do not pretend to have such knowledge. I would like to apologize for any shortcomings I might have. I wanted to appear before you this afternoon because I also wanted to express my solidarity with and admiration for the Canadian troops engaged in the theatres of operations. It is in the form of a tribute to your injured and fallen, especially in the Afghan theatre, that I am pleased to try and help you in your deliberations. I do so quite humbly, because I do not possess all the required expertise. However, I can provide you with a number of pieces of information.

If I may, I will give you a very brief overview of the organization of veterans affairs in France. I will provide you with some statistics. Following that, I will touch on the budgetary aspect. Lastly, with your permission, I will give you a very brief account of the benefits offered to our veterans. I will also talk to you about the infrastructure and institutions we have in France to welcome them.

First of all, allow me to explain or, at least, remind you of the structure of the Defence Department. In France, the Minister of Defence delegates the responsibility of veterans to a Secretary of State for Defence. This structure was set up in 1999. Prior to that, our structure was the same as here in Canada. Today, veterans fall under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Defence through a delegated authority.

I would like to point out that, in addition to the delegate responsible for veterans, the Minister of Defence has three principal subordinates. The first is the Army Chief of Staff, the counterpart of Canada's Chief of the Defence staff. The second subordinate is the Delegate General for Armament. This person is responsible for all military equipment and procurement programs; his duties are similar to those of Canada's Minister of Public Works and the Assistant Deputy Minister for Materiel. The third subordinate is the Secretary General, Administration. As his title indicates, he is responsible for the administration of the Department of Defence and has duties similar to those of Canada's Deputy Minister of Defence.

I have given you this brief outline of the organization to show that the Secretary of State for Defence, the Minister of State delegated by the Minister, relies on the Secretary General, Administration, for all things administrative. I will also explain how the Secretary General, Administration, is responsible for managing the veterans' affairs program.

I would like to give you a few statistics to show you the scope of our activities. There are some 3.6 million veterans in France. In 2008, there were approximately 361,000 former personnel who were pensioners.

The resources available to the Department of Defence in order to conduct its missions are voted on annually by way of financial pieces of legislation. Generally speaking, these are in conformity with what we in France call a military action plan act, which covers a five-year period. The last plan ran from 2003 to 2008, and the next one will be in effect from 2009 to 2014.

I would also like to indicate that we have had an organic act concerning our financial legislation since 2006. Allow me to explain. There is a principle by which resources are allocated by mission and program, taking into account objectives and performance indicators. This is simply a best practice that is commonly used by all governments. It is a way to measure the performance of the state's actions.

Allow me to delve deeper into the department. The Minister of Defence is given four missions. The first being essentially its defence mission, i.e., preparing its personnel and equipment. The second, suffice it to say, is a security mission. The third deals with research and higher education, and the fourth is an interdepartmental mission, which includes the veterans affairs, heritage and public outreach components. It is therefore a full-fledged mission of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

This last mission contains two programs. The first has to do with the relationship between the army and the French people. The main goal is to promote the spirit of defence and create outreach opportunities throughout the year, including what we call the Journée d'appel de la préparation à la défense (defence readiness day). This is a day that is organized for teenagers and young adults, allowing them to spend a day on various defence sites and to share with them a number of messages concerning citizenship, and the need to ensure defence and security. This is what we call a JAPD for short, and it allows some 780,000 young people to participate each year. That is the national outreach component, which represents some 7% of the Veterans Affairs budget. The remaining 93% of the budget, as you have gathered, is allocated to the second program, which contains recognition and redress measures for our veterans.

Here again, allow me to give you a few statistics. The recognition and redress program amounts to 93% of the Veterans Affairs budget, or exactly 7.1% of the total Defence budget. Therefore, out of the total Defence budget, 7.1% are allocated to redress and recognition measures, and particularly our veterans' pensions.

Allow me to place a few things into perspective. The French Defence budget includes 21% for military equipment and 44% for personnel readiness and wages. That is to compare those 7% with the costs associated with the activities of our forces and their equipment.

Allow me to talk to you more about the recognition and redress program, which is, as I indicated, under the responsibility of the Secretary General, Administration, and not of the Minister of State for Veterans Affairs. That is why I found it useful, in my introduction, to give you an outline of the Defense Department's structure.

What is the purpose of the program? It is to provide recipients with all the redress or recognition benefits they are entitled to. They are allocated according to what we call the Military Disability Pension and War Victims Code. This code is basically the current regime for veterans' who are entitled to a military disability pension.

The recognition and redress program is a four-pronged action plan. First, there is the administration of life annuities. Simply put, this is the payment of our veterans military disability and retirement pensions. The second action—and this might more particularly be the subject of your questions—is the management of military pension rights. I can give you a few examples. Veterans have the right to free medical care, the right to necessary equipment and the right to draw social security. These are rights concerning taxation, transport, retirement homes as well as access to a number of institutions made available to veterans.

In particular, I would like to speak about the Institution Nationale des Invalides [national institution for the disabled] and the Office National des Anciens Combattants et Victimes de Guerre [the national veterans and war victims board]. But I will return to that point in a few moments, if you don't mind.

The third component of the program is the solidarity component. It includes the various benefits that we provide to veterans, in particular the veterans retirement allowance. We also offer access to a number of group insurance retirement plans and various forms of administrative assistance.

The fourth component of the program covers maintenance of the commemorative sites. Most of these sites are perpetual graveyards for various categories of disabled veterans or veterans who had received a war pension.

The fifth component is just the actual administration of the first four components that I have told you about.

If you don't mind, I would like to give you a few more figures.

On average, France provides 9,154 euros in funding per pensioner per year, for a total of 361,000 pensioners in our country. Of course, the figures I am giving you are for 2008; I do not have figures for 2009.

Later we will be able to go back to the specific entitlements of veterans and the various benefits paid. I can provide you with a list of the various benefits. After these introductory remarks, I will be entirely at your disposal to answer your questions.

First and foremost, I would like to tell you about two specific institutions that provide support to French veterans. The first institution is called the Office National des Anciens Combattants et Victimes de Guerre. This board, which is specifically French, was established in 1916. It is a government administrative agency, national in scope, that comes under the umbrella of the veterans affairs ministry. The mandate of the National Veterans and War Victims Board is to serve the 3.6 million veterans in France. The primary mandate of the agency is to provide social and administrative assistance. The board has offices in all the departments of France. It also runs retirement homes for veterans and occupational training schools for disabled people who need to retrain because they cannot resume the job that they had before they became disabled.

The second institution is the Institution Nationale des Invalides, whose mandate is to assist disabled people and provide hospital care. One notable feature of the institution is a medical and surgical centre that takes part in various studies and research on equipment and devices for the disabled. For more than three centuries, this institution has benefited from the protection of the head of state.

At the current time, in 2009, France is consolidating these various entitlements, because we now have more and more veterans. We must enhance these entitlements, particularly in financial terms. For example, we must enhance the value of military pensions. In the past few years, the issue of what we call "décristallisation" has been a major topic of discussion in France. I doubt that this term can be translated.

"Décristallisation" means that henceforth, benefits paid to veterans must be the same for all those who fought for France, in particular for those people who are citizens of states that once were held or administered by France. In other words, a military pensioner in Morocco or Algeria must collect the same pension as his French comrade in arms, if he fought alongside French soldiers at one time in the past.

This is a major issue that has been dealt with in recent years, and has now been solved. These pensioners are now entitled to the same benefits, the same amounts, as those paid to their French counterparts.

Our program is also working to improve the situation of retired combatants, group annuities and compensation for the orphans whose parents were the victims of antisemitic persecution or barbaric acts that occurred during the Second World War. So that is the current state of affairs as of late 2008. So as you can see, the veterans affairs ministry is mostly consolidating and improving entitlements, not opening up new areas for investigation.

I am not quite sure how much time you had given me for my presentation. I can briefly explain the specifics of the pension and provide you more details about the benefits that we provide to veterans. I'm in your hands for that kind of question.

Well, there you have it Mr. Chairman. I'm finished.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you very much, Colonel Verney.

The first questioner will be MP Dryden.

[Ken Dryden, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Colonel Verney.

I am wondering if you could give us some context. You have given us some details, but I would like to hear from you how the general population views this system. What are the major criticisms of this system from veterans and from the general population?

[Col Jean-Michel Verney]

Thank you, sir.

As I described the administrative structures to you, for the most part, we are working at two levels. The first concern, of course, is the value of the pensions paid to our veterans and the coverage for illness. I believe that this is the major concern. Then we have all the various benefits provided to veterans, such as access to group retirement plans, payments to retired combatants and tax breaks. Probably efforts could be made in that regard.

Our second area of concern is recognition of certain theatres of operations and certain campaigns. As you know, history is not always very simple. At certain points in history, it is not an easy task to determine the exact status and the exact entitlements of people who took part in these operations. One example would be service in Northern Africa or far more difficult issues such as service during nuclear trials. According to some stakeholders, and according to people who took part in various operations, the state may not be going far enough in terms of recognizing service at certain points in history or during certain foreign operations or during certain times of crisis.

For example, we do recognize the theatres of operations of some battles in North Africa, but our methods of calculating entitlements do not necessarily work in the best interests of those who took part in the events. Allow me to explain. When you are in a theatre of operations, you are subject to what we call the principle of the single campaign. In other words, when your retirement entitlements are calculated, if you spent 90 days in the theatre of operations, you double these 90 days and you receive a total of 180 days. This principle is not recognized in certain theatres of operations, and veterans are fighting these mechanisms for determining entitlements.

To sum up, I would say that improvements will not be attained by looking for new mechanisms, but rather, by calling for larger pensions and better tax breaks. In the final analysis, we must determine how to make things easier for veterans from a financial point of view when they find themselves in difficulty. And finally, we want all theatres of operations to be recognized.

Once again, I was reading the document from Veterans Affairs about activities in 2008 and the record for that year. If the truth be told, it really is all about consolidating entitlements rather than looking for new possibilities.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Two minutes, Mr. Dryden.

[Ken Dryden, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

I would like to ask you another question in the same vein.

It would appear that in some countries, the system for veterans' affairs has a bad reputation, almost scandalous. There is a major difference between what actually exists and what seems to be fair. In France, is the system pretty fair or does it require many changes? Are conditions almost scandalous?

[Col Jean-Michel Verney]

Mr. Dryden, that is not a delicate issue in France, the government is not having trouble with that issue, nor does it have to improve outcomes. I would say that there is a certain consensus on veterans' affairs, and there have not been pressing demands from veterans. So I am not able to compare our system to those in other countries, and I probably do not have the expertise to do so either.

I should say right from the outset that in France, we have a formula for social security that is not just for military staff. It is a form of health insurance for all Frenchmen and Frenchwomen, and I acknowledge that this basic coverage is very expensive, and the deficits are very large—that is the difficult part of the issue—but on the other hand, our social security system is a good foundation for working together and building a system of pension payments, benefits and other entitlements for our veterans. So our system starts with a foundation this is called the social security, and once again, there may be criticism, but the system is there for all Frenchmen and Frenchwomen. So I do not think that people feel that the government is doing a poor job of taking care of veterans.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Colonel.

Monsieur Gaudet is next.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Colonel Verney.

I do have a small question. In France, do you have a charter of veterans' rights?

[Col Jean-Michel Verney]

A charter of veterans' rights?

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Yes.

[Col Jean-Michel Verney]

I could not tell you.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Do you have an ombudsman for veterans?

[Col Jean-Michel Verney]

An ombudsman?

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

An advocate.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

A kind of judge who defends the interests of veterans.

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

He is appointed by the state.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

He is appointed by the state.