Veterans Affairs Committee on Feb. 14th, 2012

[Dr. David Pedlar]

In the studies we have information on deployments--in other words, that they were in Afghanistan--so we can analyze those as a subgroup. We have not done detailed analysis of that group yet because the ten-year group we're looking at actually participated in a number of difficult deployments, which would be Rwanda, Somalia, and a number of others. So far we've been looking at the population as a whole, but we haven't focused on deployment-specific analysis. We will be able to focus on some deployment-specific analysis as we move forward.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

What further analysis are you looking to conduct?

[Dr. David Pedlar]

I think a member earlier talked about the transition interviews. A really great example of how you can use this in a really practical way is that because of the way we're able to link data we're able to look at who participates in transition interviews, who doesn't, and we also know who are more at risk of negative outcomes after they transition. So it gives us an opportunity to take a look at whether the people who are using SCAN seminars and transition interviews, for example, are the people who are at most risk of outcomes later.

That's just a very practical example; however, there are a number of other ones. For example, we know suicide is a problem, so we're doing more work in the area of suicide and thoughts about suicide. The goal there is to be able to intervene in pathways that people follow that can result in suicide, in terms of how to build suicide prevention plans in the department.

These are two examples, but I could give you three or four more if you wished.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

That would be fine.

Thank you, Dr. Pedlar and Ms. Adams.

Mr. Casey, for five minutes.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to put forward a motion. You received a copy of the motion on November 18, 2011. It reads as follows:

That, in light of the alleged recent breaches of privacy in which political staff from the office of the Minister of Veterans Affairs may have repeatedly accessed the personal records of at least one veteran, the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs conduct extensive open and public hearings in order to better understand what safeguards currently exist to protect the privacy of veterans; That the committee provide recommendations to the government to better protect the privacy of our veterans and ensure access to personal or medical records is properly restricted to prevent their use for political purposes or accessed by political officials to intimidate veterans; That the committee be tasked with finding what "best practices" exists in other jurisdictions to protect the privacy of veteran and that the Committee report its findings back to the House within two sitting weeks after completion of its study.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Mr. Chair, a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Thank you, Mr. Casey. And yes, your motion would be in order. But I would point out that once again you're interrupting witnesses who have moved here directly to make presentations as part of the study under way.

I would suggest, with the indulgence of the committee, that perhaps if we shorten this session today and take the last 15 minutes to address this, that might find some favour with the committee, as opposed to interrupting the witnesses who have been called forward today. I would suggest that we put this off until the latter part of the meeting and then discuss where it may go from there.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

I'm comfortable with your suggestion, Mr. Chairman, as long as the discussion on this motion is held in public. If the discussion is not held in public, then I insist we deal with it now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

I have to take guidance from the committee on the intent there. Certainly we can start a meeting in public and.... It's up to the committee.

Is there any comment?

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

I don't want to inconvenience these witnesses. They've come all this way. They're discussing suicide implications for our veterans, they're talking about unemployment rates, and so on.

I move that we go in camera right now, then, if you insist on dealing with it now. We can have that discussion now. It's very regrettable to be pulling this type of stunt again and inconveniencing witnesses yet again when we're here to talk about the services we provide to our veterans and how we might go about improving them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Did you make a motion to go in camera?

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

The motion is non-debatable if it's a motion to go in camera.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

You have my motion. You have to deal with my motion before you can entertain a new one, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

No. A motion to go in camera is always in order, I think.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Are we going to have a debate on the motion to go in camera?

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

No. It's non-debatable.

[Dick Harris, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

It's already set in the precedents.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

We don't have consensus.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

I would ask for a recorded division if we're proceeding to a vote on this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

We had a motion, and now we have a motion to go in camera to discuss the motion. It's non-debatable, so we're going to vote. We've been asked for a recorded vote.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

The motion is accepted. But I'm going to take the unusual step of taking a brief recess before we go in camera, and apologize on behalf of the committee for this interruption. I appreciate you coming. Perhaps you would wish to stay around for a while. These in-camera meetings are open only to members of the committee and staff assigned to them. So we'll take a couple of minutes. As I say, this wasn't expected, but sometimes these side trips come up.

[Proceedings continue in camera]

[Public proceedings resume]

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

I appreciate your coming back. Thank you for that.

We're going to shorten down the question time a bit because we had committee business to deal with.

I think we go to Mr. Lobb.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

My first question is for Mr. Pedlar. In the information you provided us here, we're talking about veterans. Veterans were no more likely to experience unemployment; it was about 8% at the time of the survey, which is comparable to the general population. Can you just go over for the committee again the sample that you studied to get that rate? Who were these veterans? Was it every veteran? How did you establish this?

[Dr. David Pedlar]

It was a very comprehensive study, in the sense that Statistics Canada was able to get a list of everyone who released over the ten-year period from 1996 to 2007. There would be some that were dropped, but for the most part it would be an inclusive list of everyone who was released during that time period, except that we did not include reserves, not because we didn't want to, but because there were problems with the data and information.

[Ben Lobb, Conservative, Huron—Bruce, ON]

Certainly the number would be over 100,000 that was sampled.