[Inaudible--Editor]
Evidence of meeting #10 for Veterans Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pension.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #10 for Veterans Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pension.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
I have four minutes, Jim, and you're interrupting me. Thank you, because I have other questions to get to.
Mr. Scott, how is your son doing now?
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
12:20 p.m.
President, Equitas Society
He's training himself. He just put himself through a paramedic training program and he's going to try to become an ambulance attendant, but he's paying for all those courses himself.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
Okay.
Sorry, I did want to correct something for the record. No changes were made to the Canada Pension Plan. That's still 65. The only thing that was changed was OAS at 67.
Mr. Kirkland, I have a question for you, but I guess also a question, Mr. Scott, for the other folks who are part of the Equitas suit. To better educate the committee—and this would be done in camera, not in public —would it be fair to ask the members whom you represent to provide the committee with information on all of the benefits, payments, etc. that have been received by those folks so that we as a committee can be better educated? As in, here's what we're talking about, here's what these guys, these folks, actually received versus the Pension Act, or whatever it is. Would it be fair to ask for that information?
12:20 p.m.
President, Equitas Society
We can do that because all of that information is in the pleading and some of it's in that 72-page document that I've just given. So we're open to providing that and having an analysis.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
So we can collect that and can collect it from DND, or whoever else is involved?
12:20 p.m.
President, Equitas Society
Yes we've always said that if you want.... One of the biggest issues, and I don't want to gobble up your time, is people's right to privacy of their medical records. What we've said to all of the representative plaintiffs is that if you begin this process, you are now open to everybody.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
We wouldn't use it in public. It would be in camera just so we can inform ourselves on that.
Mr. Kirkland, you've said that you've taken advantage of the program and stuff, and that's great. Have you looked at what you would have received under the Pension Act versus what you actually did receive in your particular case?
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
12:20 p.m.
Equitas Society Veterans Council
Yes, what I'm receiving now and what I will be receiving is a mere fraction.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
How much would you have received under the Pension Act?
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
How much did you receive from the new Veterans Charter including retraining and so on?
12:25 p.m.
Equitas Society Veterans Council
I paid for most of the schooling by myself.
12:25 p.m.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Peter Stoffer
Thank you very much, Mr. Hawn. Mr. Kirkland, thank you.
We'll now move on to the four-minute round, our second round, starting with Madame Perreault.
December 10th, 2013 / 12:25 p.m.
NDP
Manon Perreault NDP Montcalm, QC
Hello. I would like to thank the witnesses for being here with us today.
I will be sharing my time with Mr. Chicoine.
I am going to speak from the heart. It breaks my heart to hear testimony such as that given by Mr. Berry, Mr. Bedard and Mr. Kirkland. I do not understand why Canadians with the same injuries are not entitled to the same amount of money. Everyone should receive the same amount of money for injuries with the same consequences.
It is easy to see that I have a physical disability. That is clear. Mr. Hawn said earlier that the government has the power to change the laws passed by another government. However, the government also has the duty to take care of our veterans.
It is unacceptable that there are so many inequities among veterans. It is unacceptable that there are so many suicides. There are many problems in this regard. These people need support and it is up to us as members of Parliament to ensure that veterans have access to care and are closely monitored.
That brings me to my question. In Canada, employers have the duty to accommodate their employees. When a person has an accident or is injured, his employer is obligated to accommodate him so that he can continue to work. Does the same obligation exist toward our veterans? In a situation where veterans are no longer able to do what they could in the past, do we simply cast them aside or do we suggest other directions for them to take?
12:25 p.m.
President, Equitas Society
That's a very good question.
What happens—we get a lot of this from the wives—when a soldier is injured, say in Afghanistan, is that they come back, and there's this initial gathering around. Then they find out that they will not meet the universality of service and they'll be removed from their employment. A process has been started and, if they are not severely disabled, they will get some retraining and then they will be on their own. That is causing tremendous hardship on a lot of families because, although you retrain somebody, that does not guarantee that they're going to get a job. It just means that you retrain them for the purpose of getting a job.
So the duty to accommodate—and then there is a reasonableness clause to that—is found. For instance, with the RCMP we had a young lady who had her leg shot off up in an interior town in British Columbia. She was able to retain her job within the RCMP in the province of British Columbia. Injuries like that in the military could very well have you retrained but then sent into the civilian world. The issue here is that normally a workers' compensation program ensures income, because it is the income that people are concerned about, not how much money they get. We are separating the veterans who want to stay in the military from their income source, which is the military, and we're taking the step of retraining them. But in all cases, it's not enough; they don't have a job at the end of it.