Veterans Affairs Committee on Oct. 1st, 2012

[John D. Larlee]

Perhaps I could refer that question to our legal director for a response.

[Kathleen Vent, Acting Director, Legal Services, Veterans Review and Appeal Board]

At our last member seminar we had guests from both the Legion and the Bureau of Pensions Advocates. A common theme that was exposed was the problem veterans have in gathering their evidence at the first instance.

From recent conversations we've had with reps from the ombudsman's office, I know his office as well is very interested in the disclosure that's occurring to veterans. Often veterans are getting a first-level decision without really being aware of the evidence that was reviewed in the rendering of that decision.

I would agree. I think there are issues with evidence, especially at first instance. Anything that can be done by all of the organizations to help the veterans get better evidence at first instance would be assistive.

[Bryan Hayes, Conservative, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

There are various levels: the review itself, the appeal hearing, and then there are other procedures for review and appeal, including reconsideration and the judicial review. It could be the Tax Court of Canada. It could be a compassionate award.

I'm trying to get a sense of how you're counting an appeal. If an individual launches an appeal and it goes to the review stage, and then if it fails and the person goes to the appeal hearing, does that count as two separate incidents or as only one incident in terms of calculating the number of appeals that the particular individual has launched? Of course, the individual may go to a third stage of appeal. Is each one counted separately?

[Voices]

Yes.

[Bryan Hayes, Conservative, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

That's interesting.

I'm getting a sense again, through Mr. Lobb's questioning.... The ombudsman released a report; obviously there was an action plan, but I'm getting a sense that there's still something missing, and that's the case management system, somehow. I'm getting a sense that data.... We're asking questions today, and the data isn't not readily available because either the data isn't there or the system isn't there.

Is there something lacking in terms of a case management system, in your opinion?

[Dale Sharkey]

In terms of managing cases, I believe that's better directed to Veterans Affairs, because managing cases is their role. As Ms. Vent described, I believe veterans bring their cases to the Veterans Review and Appeal Board and usually have an expert representative work with them, someone who's very knowledgeable about the law and the kinds of evidence they need to bring forward. In a sense, then, Veterans Affairs provides free legal advice to veterans to help them with their cases. As I understand it, this is unique in the world.

We look at the information and evidence brought before us and try to render the very best decisions that we can to explain to them why their cases were approved or denied.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Thank you very much, Mr. Hayes.

That will end round one. We have time for one each from the NDP and the Conservative side.

I'll go to Mr. Stoffer, please.

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

Thank you.

Ms. Sharkey, I believe you said 100-some were sent back to the minister for reconsideration under section 85. How many of those that the Federal Court ordered back were for a particular case, such as a hearing loss?

[Dale Sharkey]

I don't have that information with me today, but they wouldn't be ordered by the Federal Court. It is what we decided was the fair thing to do around the hearing loss cases. We decided to allow the veterans, as a result of that Federal Court decision you're referring to, to have a first decision.

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

I understand the BPA and why there's legal advice to veterans to help them as their cases meander through the appeals and everything else, but when you look at it objectively, you see people who have served their country who are now saying that they have a problem or an issue of some sort, and they are denied. Then, of course, the generous government offers them legal help in pursuing their cases with the government or the department.

I've spoken to many veterans who feel they are doing something wrong in actually begging the government for legal help when they feel their medical documents and their word should be enough. It is unfortunate that we still have this situation. I understand why, and I appreciate why, but it is rather unfortunate, when you look at it objectively outside the system, that veterans need lawyers or legal help to pursue a hearing loss or pension benefit of any kind. Hopefully one day we can get around that.

I just say that as a comment. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Thank you, Mr. Stoffer.

Mr. Zimmer, you're listed here as the last questioner.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

I'll defer to our guest and Ms. Adams.

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

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank you for coming in today and for the good work you do in assisting veterans.

Could you give me a descriptive overview of the type of qualitative improvement that the veterans who come before you experience in their lives as they're going through their hearings, and then once you've provided them with a decision within the year? Do you have some examples of that, perhaps one of a younger veteran and one of an older veteran?

[Dale Sharkey]

I think you're perhaps referring to the benefits that Veterans Affairs provides. Some of them are linked to a pension or an award decision to which they are entitled.

If a favourable decision is rendered at the board to give entitlement, obviously that entitlement would enable them to gain access to certain treatment and medical benefits. I'm not an expert in that area. That really is an area for the department.

As we mentioned, we vary 50% of our review decisions and 30% of our appeal decisions, so certainly there's a financial element that comes to the veteran based on an increase in entitlement, a new entitlement, or an increase in assessment.

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

Very briefly, to sum up, could you remind us of some of the experiences of the board members, especially any board members who have any military experience?

[John D. Larlee]

The makeup of the board, with our retired police, RCMP, and military members, enables us as a group of, at present, 24 board members to have input from them in our training sessions. It gives us a more robust and more knowledgeable work environment. They assist us in providing us with information that is very beneficial when we are travelling the country conducting hearings.

I think that given the way the board is structured and given our merit-based system of applicants who apply to come to the board, we have a very good cadre of members who become experts in the field. They are very, very interested and committed to make sure that the applicants, the veterans, whether they are still-serving CF members or RCMP or members of families, receive all the benefits to which they're entitled in their application.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Thank you very much, Mr. Larlee.

That concludes our time for witnesses.

To the witnesses, thank you very much for coming. I'm sure you may get an invitation later to return. That's up to the committee, of course.

I'm going to suspend and tell everybody here that because we're going to be discussing witnesses, we'll come back in camera to discuss the witness list.

I thank all the visitors for being here as well today. It's nice to have you all here.

[Proceedings continue in camera]