Evidence of meeting #43 for Veterans Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was c-55.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Keith Hillier  Assistant Deputy Minister, Service Delivery, Department of Veterans Affairs
Mary Chaput  Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Veterans Affairs
Jean-Rodrigue Paré  Committee Researcher

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome, everyone, to meeting number 43 of the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs. Pursuant to Standing Order 81(5), under supplementary estimates (C) 2010-11, votes 1c and 5c under Veterans Affairs were referred to the committee on Tuesday, February 8, 2011.

Appearing before us this afternoon is the Honourable Jean-Pierre Blackburn, Minister of Veterans Affairs. From the Department of Veterans Affairs, we have with us Keith Hillier, assistant deputy minister, service delivery; Mary Chaput, associate deputy minister; and André Joannette, director general, finance division.

Welcome.

Mr. Minister, would you like to start, please?

4 p.m.

Jonquière—Alma Québec

Conservative

Jean-Pierre Blackburn ConservativeMinister of Veterans Affairs

Thank you, Mr. Chair, fellow parliamentarians and all of you here today, ladies and gentlemen.

I am pleased to appear before the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs to present the budgetary estimates for my department, Veterans Affairs Canada, for the last fiscal year and the upcoming one.

But before I get into the numbers, I would first like to thank the members of the committee for their work on Bill C-55. Thanks to your understanding and compassion, we have been able to move quickly towards the passage of this meaningful bill in the House of Commons. I thank you and Canada's veterans thank you.

Allow me to digress for a moment. We wanted to fast-track this bill through the Senate. But it seems that the Liberal senators would not let that happen, I have just learned. I am not sure whether you can intervene to help us at all, but we all know how important it is that we vote on the bill as soon as possible. There is talk of a vote of non-confidence in the government on Friday. At least we will have done everything we could on our end.

Once the bill known as the Enhanced New Veterans Charter Act has received royal assent, it will give our most seriously injured soldiers broader access to better financial support as they transition to civilian life. We can all agree that these changes are a step in the right direction.

As Veterans Ombudsman Guy Parent told the committee on March 1, this bill is a small but important step that should not be delayed to try to improve it at this stage. That work will continue as we go forward.

4 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON

Excuse me, Mr. Chair--

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

Okay. Mr. Minister--

4 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON

Excuse me for interrupting. The minister is here to talk about the estimates, and talking about a Conservative-dominated Senate and saying that the Liberals are holding up Bill C-55 is, I think, totally out of line. It's out of line to be mentioning it. I suggest that it's probably not even true, because we have been very committed and have been on the record, and this committee put it through very quickly.

I really object to the minister going off what he should be talking about--the supplementary estimates, which is what he came here for--and making accusations, which at this particular moment I'm not going to be running over to the Senate to find out about, because I know it's a Conservative-dominated Senate and no longer a Liberal-dominated Senate.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

Do you have a point of order, Mr. Blaney?

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Jean-Pierre Blackburn Conservative Jonquière—Alma, QC

Mr. Chair, I would just like to follow up on what I said by adding one thing that was brought to my attention. We wanted to fast-track the bill to proceed directly to second reading. And we needed unanimous consent to do that, but the Liberal senators would not agree. That has delayed the process somewhat.

Just how much of an impact will that delay have on whether or not the bill is passed? I cannot say. That being said, if my information is incorrect, I would happily withdraw my remarks at any point, of course.

That work will continue as—

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

Excuse me; Mr. Blaney had an intervention.

Go ahead, Mr. Blaney.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Steven Blaney Conservative Lévis—Bellechasse, QC

I want to say something regarding the point of order, Mr. Chair.

I find it inappropriate to interrupt the witness, who has come here to meet with us today. First of all, my colleague's comments are out of place. The Prime Minister impressed upon us the importance of getting Bill C-55 passed quickly. He put the situation into context.

I think the members of this committee should at least have the decency to listen to what the witness has to say. Afterwards, every member will have an opportunity to ask the minister questions.

Interrupting the witness while he is making his opening statement is uncalled for.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

Okay. I--

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON

Mr. Chair, this is a televised debate. When this airs tomorrow and the next day, those comments will be interpreted as factual, and I don't believe that's what the minister came here to speak to us about. He came here to speak about the supplementary estimates, and I would ask that he focus his comments on that issue.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

I've taken everything into consideration; Mr. Minister, please carry on, but we are here to do the estimates.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Jean-Pierre Blackburn Conservative Jonquière—Alma, QC

Mr. Chair, as far as these budget numbers go, it is important to understand that every action and decision made at the Department of Veterans Affairs is geared toward improving services and benefits for Canada's most deserving citizens.

The changing demographic profile of Canada's veterans, their changing needs and requirements, and our involvement in Afghanistan have all resulted in more modern-day veterans than we anticipated applying for and receiving benefits under the New Veterans Charter. We are also seeing situations where new medical conditions arise at a later date or where additional difficulties affect veterans. As a result, veterans who already receive a benefit are coming back to us for additional help.

I also want to point out that our efforts over the past year to improve the process of awarding disability benefits have contributed to this increased spending. As of the end of February 2011, the number of disability claims processed increased by 15% this year over last year. As a result, we've put $72 million more in the hands of Canada's veterans.

We have also seen an increase in the uptake of the rehabilitation and career transition programs. The year after the New Veterans Charter was introduced, there were just over 1,100 veterans taking advantage of these programs. This year, there were over 3,800, and we are forecasting over 4,600 next year. That's a 22% increase. It is important to keep in mind that Canada's veterans and their families are the main beneficiaries of this spending growth.

Mr. Chair, you will also notice that we asked for an additional $9.4 million to support the veterans independence program. This reflects the fact that Canada's veterans are still in good health. Our traditional war service veterans are living longer and healthier lives, so they are able to remain in their homes with the help of grounds keeping and housekeeping services. This means fewer of them are moving to long-term care facilities. Again, this is another indication that our programs are effective and being well-used by veterans.

In relation to the spending on the Agent Orange program, I made an announcement in Fredericton back in December that the program would be extended. Our government committed additional funding, some of which is reflected in the numbers you see for both this year and next year. Essentially, that allowed us to change the program's criteria. First, we removed a restriction on eligibility. That allowed more widows to apply for the ex-gratia payment. Second, we changed the date in terms of getting a diagnosis. Since the announcement, we have contacted nearly 1,300 individuals to obtain consent to review their file, and we actually have received a number of new applications as well. The bottom line is that as of March 11, 2011, we have approved payments for over 300 individuals.

Once again, these increases speak to a desire to improve the quality of life for Canada's veterans and their families. They also underline some of the fundamental changes made to how we conduct business at the department these days. We are making real progress in reducing the complexity of the processes and programs, overhauling service delivery, strengthening partnerships with the Department of National Defence and others, sustaining the New Veterans Charter, and adapting the department to the changing demographics of our veterans.

As I mentioned, productivity at Veterans Affairs is up by about 15%. We have increased our team of adjudicators, improved our business processes and introduced better monitoring. We are doing a better job of communicating with veterans, giving clearer direction as to the type of information we need in order to be able to move forward with an application.

We have also made certain investments in technology. These are minor investments for the moment, and of course we have to quicken our pace. We will do more on this front.

I must mention other important progress: between January 2010 and January 2011, we reduced the number of disability claims waiting to be adjudicated by 36%. We are processing disability applications faster. As of early this month, March 8, 78% of first applications were completed within 16 weeks. The result, of course, impacts our budget for the upcoming year.

For 2011-2012, we project spending $3.5 billion, an increase of $109.1 million in comparison to the previous main estimates, or 3.2% from the previous year. I wish to point out that expenses related to Bill C-55 will not be added to the budget as long as the law has not been enacted, but we have provided for the costs related to the program. Some projects have already been approved and there are several others to come.

And finally, Mr. Chair, I don't want to leave you with the impression that all we do is spend money at Veterans Affairs Canada. We are very cognizant of the tight fiscal environment in which our country finds itself. There are some decreases in next year's anticipated spending amounting to $85 million. This is due to a decrease in the forecasted number of War Service Veterans who will receive benefits from the department. As such, some program spending has been adjusted downward.

As well, the Veterans Review and Appeal Board has been established as a separate entity under the Financial Administration Act, which means that the expenditure will no longer appear in the department's spending. These estimates represent an important commitment by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Government of Canada to invest significantly in the health and well-being of Canada's veterans and their families.

I have enjoyed travelling across the country these last few months and talking with our veterans and telling them about the service improvements taking place in their name. Their feedback and yours have been invaluable, as has been the advice from their advocates. I of course plan to continue that dialogue to ensure all of our programs and services are continuously adapted and adjusted to better fit the evolving needs of both our traditional and modern-day veterans and their families.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Our first question is from Ms. Sgro.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON

Is it correct that the minister is here for one hour?

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

That's correct.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON

Thank you.

Welcome, Mr. Blackburn. I'm glad that we finally have you here before the committee. You've been the minister for quite a while and, for a variety of reasons, this is your first chance to come before us, so I'm glad that you're here. Thank you for coming and attempting to address us and for hearing some of the issues that we hear on a day-to-day basis from veterans and their families when they come before us.

We certainly hear from our departmental officials, with their desire to make a difference, but we also hear from many about the inadequacies and the large percentage of our veterans who are not getting their needs met. Given the fact that we have a lot of men and women coming home from Afghanistan in the next short while, I would expect an increase in the budget. I know you also referred to the fact that there would be a decrease in other areas.

How are you planning to ensure that your department will be sensitive to the many needs of the men and women who are coming home? How are you going to monitor the refusal rate of so many veterans, who come to us here and express their frustration with the department because of not being able to get satisfactory services, experiencing far too much red tape, and so on?

Regulation change could have been done instead of Bill C-55 on some of these issues. Why did you not choose to go that route, and why did you instead introduce a bill that will require a lengthy time to make these changes?

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

Jean-Pierre Blackburn Conservative Jonquière—Alma, QC

Thank you for your comments and questions.

With regard to our veterans who are returning from Afghanistan, we have put in place a special team to process their files more quickly. For instance, decisions on rehabilitation programs are handed down within a two-week time frame. As for benefits they may obtain under the department's various programs, be it the disability benefit or others, we have also accelerated the process and we can respond to their applications within 16 weeks. People may wonder why it takes 16 weeks when it should be done within three or four. There are also all sorts of reasons for that. Previously the turnaround time was 24 weeks, it is now 16, and we are continuing to improve the process. However, in order to make a decision we need all of the relevant information, the medical information in particular. It is very important that our employees have all of the documents in hand so as to be able to make a decision. Often, some of the information comes from the Department of National Defence, in particular the files and other documents, and all of this takes time.

Allow me to tell you that we are really making progress, making improvements. In the coming days our frontline employees will have the power to make decisions. And so they will no longer have to refer the case to levels above them, which led to delay after delay. The whole process within the department is evolving in order to meet our veterans' needs more quickly.

In addition, I will not deny that our department has aged as our veterans have, veterans of the Second World War, the Korean War and our various peace missions. And then our modern- day veterans appeared. We were not prepared from this sudden culture change, and the change in the needs of our modern-day veterans. These are completely different needs, as compared to those of our older veterans. For instance, we were not prepared to process their files using the Internet, and we are still not able to do so. This is one of the changes we are making. We will see what answers tomorrow's budget will contain in this regard. We are truly undergoing a period of major change and we are taking that reality into account, and the needs of our military people.

I also want to point out that we are processing our modern-day veterans' files in light of the New Veterans Charter approved in 2005. This should be an evolving charter but in reality there were no changes made over four or four and half years. Why was this the case? The situation was not the same. When our modern-day veterans come back injured from Afghanistan, for instance after having had a leg amputated, they are still members of the armed forces and they remain there during two or three years on full salary. It is only after that period that they deal with us and that they really come under Veterans Affairs Canada. All of this reality caught up with us quickly over the past 18 months, and this has meant that we must now pick up our pace. This is what we are doing at this time. Bill C-55 has not yet been passed. For that reason, we will not be able to give our modern-day veterans all of the benefits we want to give them. All of the flaws that need to be corrected will not be as long as the bill has not become law. Moreover, there will be a six-month lag before the regulations come into effect.

I tried to give you some specific details to reply to your comments.

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON

Kirsty, go ahead.

4:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

You have one minute, Ms. Duncan.

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Minister, thank you for coming.

I think one of the most pressing issues is operational stress injuries. About 20% return with an OSI; we have no electronic health records, so we don't know the full extent of the problem. Very few psychiatrists have experience with PTSD, and it's difficult to get help for our vets.

I'm wondering what you will do, since I don't see anything in the budget, to help with PTSD and help our veterans get better.

4:20 p.m.

Conservative

Jean-Pierre Blackburn Conservative Jonquière—Alma, QC

These injuries, be they physical or psychological, are covered by our department. Both types of injuries are treated and veterans may benefit, for instance, from the lump sum payment, and the various services, etc. The number of clinics has doubled over the past two years. It went from 5 to 10. These are specialized clinics throughout the country that serve our veterans. Our approach has in fact led to certain results which I am going to set out for you. Veteran Affairs Canada comes to the assistance of 13,700 veterans who are suffering from mental health problems, and their families, and close to 3,500 of these veterans have been treated in our specialized clinics.

Of course, we are constantly looking for ways to better help our people. During the Second World War this illness probably existed as well, but we did not have a name for it. Now we call it operational post-traumatic stress syndrome. Science is always progressing and that is something we take into account within our department.

4:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. André, please, for the next question.

4:20 p.m.

Bloc

Guy André Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC

Good afternoon, Minister. We are pleased to have you with us today. I think this is the first time that you have appeared before this committee.

As you said, we have met with many veterans and several groups. I was surprised to hear you say that the services for veterans were moving forward, that you were improving the system and that you expected further achievements down the road.

We heard several witnesses: the president of the Royal 22nd Regiment Association, Mr. Renaud; retired Colonel Pat Stogran, a former veterans' ombudsman whose contract you did not renew; Mr. Bruce Henwood, from the Special Needs Advisory Group; Mr. Victor Marshall, chair of the Gerontological Advisory Council; Mr. Sean Bruyea, a former member of the armed forces. Mr. Mark Campbell, a soldier who stepped on a bomb in June 2008, also appeared before another committee. The generally held opinion was that the New Veterans Charter deprives disabled veterans of 40% of their income.

According to several witnesses we heard here when we studied the New Veterans Charter, it seems undeniable that the abolition of the monthly pension in favour of a lump sum payment greatly penalizes a number of veterans.

We in fact saw certain statistics in this regard. A person with a 20% disability used to receive approximately $600 to $800 monthly. Now that person would receive approximately $50,000.

If you were 21 or 22 years old, Mr. Blackburn, and you were given a choice between receiving $600 to $800 per month for life and receiving a sum of $50,000, which would you choose?

How can you tell us that you are improving the situation for veterans when you are depriving these people of a large part of their potential income by abolishing this monthly lifetime benefit? You know very well that in Quebec, as well as in other provinces in Canada, petitions were circulated asking that the lump sum payment be abolished in favour of a return to a monthly lifetime pension.

There are young people who have accidents when they are 20 or 25 years old. If, as Bill C-55 provides, this lump sum payment of $50,000 is divided into two or three payments, that only amounts to $10,000 or $15,000. It is not sufficient, it won't allow disabled persons to meet their needs for the rest of their life.

What happens in those cases?

Some mothers came here to tell us that it was often the family that then had to take on the costs related to a soldier's serious injury.

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Jean-Pierre Blackburn Conservative Jonquière—Alma, QC

Allow me to provide you with some additional clarification on this.

Indeed, the New Veterans Charter was adopted in 2005 unanimously by the House of Commons. I think that everyone was acting in good faith and wanted to help our veterans.

We did say that this was a living charter. Afterwards, the problems with it began to emerge clearly. We met some of our military people who had come back injured, and some of them had mental health problems or post-traumatic stress syndrome and they had received lump sum payments, some of which were as much as $276,000. Some of them told us that they had wasted their money and that they were not in a position to manage it well.