Veterans Affairs Committee on May 29th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Thank you, everybody. We'll come to attention and get on with business, and I apologize that we're a few minutes late. We got held up a bit at Parliament.

I want to welcome Minister Fantino. We are, in fact, dealing with the estimates today.

Minister, if you're prepared, we'll ask you to make a few opening comments. Of course, as you know, there'll be some questions from the members of the committee.

Thank you for coming.

[Julian Fantino, Conservative, Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Members, good morning.

I'm joined today by Deputy Minister Chaput.

Let me begin by thanking you for the opportunity to be here to present on something that we all regard as very important to the well-being, care, and support of our veterans and their families.

Indeed, the task before us is a great one. The situation of Canada's veterans is changing and evolving, and of course so too are the expectations and the kinds of things we need to offer them. Therefore, Veterans Affairs must change to meet their evolving needs and challenges, and we are well over halfway through a transformation initiative that has eliminated millions of steps that used to be required for veterans to spend hours interacting with Veterans Affairs on the day-to-day business.

Just over 18 months ago, veterans still had to submit to Veterans Affairs a receipt for $20, for instance, to be reimbursed for snow-clearing service. All of that, we figured, was a waste of time.

Veterans have said they want less time in an office building waiting in line for services. That's why My VAC Book and My VAC Account aim to provide those veterans with the services they need, so they don't have to travel to Veterans Affairs offices. For those who do, we have an increased network of front-line medical facilities and office locations to help veterans rehabilitate and transition to civilian life.

Much is always said about economic benefits and they no doubt play an important role, but all of that is beside the point if a veteran cannot get the medical care he or she needs. Our focus has been, and must continue to be, on the medical and rehabilitation services available for our Canadian veterans.

I am pleased to report that veterans in our country receive the best medical and rehabilitation treatment available anywhere. For example, we celebrate the 31 integrative personnel support centres, where Veterans Affairs and National Defence staff work hand in hand for the first time in generations. Together, they provide much needed care and support directly to Canada's serving members, veterans, and their families. There are the 18 operational stress injury clinics, where provincial partners deliver world-class rehabilitation support for serving members and veterans, both military and RCMP, under the guidance of Veterans Affairs' National Centre for Operational Stress Injury. These services combined with our country's strong universal health care system ensure that Canadian veterans and their families have access to one of the best health care systems in the world.

On financial benefits, much of the discussion surrounding the new Veterans Charter has been linked to the lump sum, and much of it, I'm afraid, is mostly misunderstood. Too often I hear stories of a seriously injured veteran where the media report erroneously implies that they only receive a lump sum. In fact, a seriously injured veteran is eligible for thousands of dollars each month, up to and including after age 65. Mr. Chair and members, in some cases a veteran can receive over $10,000 a month in financial compensation. This is in addition to two major tax-free award payments totalling in excess of up to half a million dollars.

Colleagues, this is all separate from the veterans independence program that will install a lift in your house, retrofit your car, or provide free medical care and rehabilitation support to veterans and their families, but I say this sincerely: more can and must be done.

Colleagues, my commitment to Canada's veterans did not begin last July, when I was appointed by Prime Minister Harper to this position. In fact, it is a mission I have been dedicated to for my entire professional life. I was a long-time tenured member of both the national and the Ontario boards of the Canadian Forces Liaison Council promoting and supporting the Canadian Forces reservists program. I was also the Department of National Defence associate minister, during which time I interacted widely with our military men and women in theatre and at home.

As well, during my four-decade career in law enforcement, I was proud to recruit Canadian veterans to policing, including at the Ontario Provincial Police and the Toronto Police Service. I wanted to recruit them because I knew they had the world-class training experience and management skills that best suited the kind of work that law enforcement agencies do on the front lines.

Maybe that's why my focus has been to see veterans' transition to civilian life enabled by well-paying jobs in the private and corporate sector, and as well, of course, in the public sector. While we may disagree on how to go about this, I believe it is irrefutable that Canadian veterans are assets to any Canadian business, and they believe that as well. The recruiting that's now going on widely in Canadian businesses is indeed encouraging. That's why, as a government, we continue to support the hire a veteran program, which matches qualified veterans to well-paying jobs. Furthermore, we have introduced the veterans hiring act, which is before Parliament as we speak.

While politics will play out, as it unfortunately must, I certainly hope I can count on every member at this table to support moving injured veterans' issues forward, moving them to the front line for federal public service jobs.

I want to be clear for a moment on this legislative proposal. The veterans must be qualified, and if they are, and have been injured in the line of duty, colleagues, those veterans should be at the front of the line. It's as simple as that.

I will now take a moment to speak about the estimates themselves.

In 2005-06 the former Liberal government approved main estimates totalling $2.85 billion. Today, you are being asked to approve main estimates totalling $3.58 billion. This means that spending at Veterans Affairs Canada this year will be $724 million higher than it was just nine years ago. That is an extra $724 million to fund everything from enhanced financial benefits to comprehensive medical, psychological, and vocational rehabilitation services for injured veterans and ill veterans.

Equally important to remember is that all of these new investments have occurred at a time when there are actually fewer veterans requiring Veterans Affairs Canada support and during a time when we've experienced a recession and government-wide cost reduction exercises. That is, I believe, a testament to the commitment of our government, the people of Canada, and all of us to ensure that our veterans are assisted as well as their families.

These main estimates reflect how we haven't just been spending more, but we are spending smarter to serve veterans better and faster than ever. I believe this is exactly what veterans and their families and all Canadians want and expect from us.

Lest we forget, Mr. Chairman and members. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Thank you very much, Mr. Minister.

We'll now go to our round of questions. As usual, we'll start with the NDP.

Mr. Stoffer, please.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Minister and Deputy Minister, for appearing today, and to all our veterans in the room, thank you very much for coming today.

Minister and Deputy Minister, I have three questions for you. Because my time is limited, I'll give you the questions first and then you can respond when you have an opportunity.

First, the briefing notes on page 2, in section B, part 1, paragraph a, refer to pensions and benefits under the Pension Act decreasing by $96 million. I wonder if you can elaborate a bit more on that and how you've come to that figure. I know it refers to war veterans, but I'd like to get a more enhanced appreciation of that figure.

Second, as you know, the government did announce, and we thank the government for allowing modern-day veterans access to the Last Post Fund. Minister, as you know, in 1995 the then finance minister, Paul Martin, cut the eligibility for the Last Post Fund from an entry level of $24,000 to $12,000. As far as I know that figure is still at $12,000. Even though modern-day veterans may be eligible for the Last Post Fund, if you do not increase the eligibility for the entry level income of $12,000 to at least 1995 levels, many, many veterans will still not be eligible for this particular program.

Basically, what that extra money would do for those veterans who are eligible, instead of getting the $3,600 they received in the past, they would get close to over $7,300. Isn't it unfair that the entry level for the $12,000 is still there, and not at least at the 1995 level? If you include inflation, that figure should be at about $40,000 entry level to the Last Post Fund.

My third question for you concerns a fair number of complaints I have received regarding the recent advertising on television. I understand this figure may be up to about $1 million. When someone calls the 1-800 number provided on the television, there is no response. The calls I have received are from people complaining that this is more political advertising and is not necessarily to help veterans.

I appreciate the fact that the government wishes to reach out to the veteran community, because many veterans, or their families, or RCMP members don't know what benefits are out there. I notice as well that you didn't mention the RCMP in the ads. The government made the decision to cut the nine offices across the country, and then did this rather expensive advertising. I must say that perception-wise, I don't think it fits well within the veterans community.

I'd like to have you respond to that, and I do thank both of you for coming today.

Thank you very much.

[Julian Fantino, Conservative, Vaughan, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr. Stoffer.

Let me start with the advertisements first. These are done with the clear intent to bring awareness to the veterans and if there is an issue with that telephone number, we'll look into that. But it's a way of reaching them as well as it is reaching Canadians who are, as you know, exposed to a lot of information back and forth about what is or isn't being done with respect to veterans. We feel it's justified. It's simply one more way of reaching out to veterans, their families, and Canadians.

On the phone number issue, if that's what's happening, I'm concerned about it, as you and others obviously are, and we'll look into it.

On the issue of the Last Post Fund, I believe the top-up was some $108 million of recent date. I think you make a good point. We should be looking at the more comprehensive response to that particular need or entitlement or benefit, if you will. I'm quite prepared to go back and revisit all of that. In fact, it's been on the list of things to do to try to bring a balance to all of these issues to current time. As we make other adjustments, we obviously need to make adjustments on the whole platform of benefits and services to veterans.

I will let the deputy answer the first question you posed, if I may.

[Mary Chaput, Deputy Minister, Department of Veterans Affairs]

You're quite right, Mr. Stoffer. The estimates do reflect a $96 million decrease in the amount for disability pensions and death payments. Those figures fell from $1.6 billion in the year previous, to $1.5 billion in these estimates. It's a direct function of the fact that traditional veterans are among us in smaller numbers and therefore their use of these programs goes down as that population goes down. It's a simple function of fewer traditional veterans still being among us in Canada and a lower draw on the associated benefits. It doesn't mean that any veteran who comes forward for those kinds of benefits would be denied; rather, it's an estimate of how many we expect to be in the program in the current year.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Do you have a brief question?

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

I think I'll pass.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Okay, thank you very much.

We'll now go to the government.

Mr. Gill, please, for six minutes.

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Mr. Chair, I also want to take this opportunity to thank the minister and deputy minister for appearing before the committee.

On our side, Mr. Chair, Mr. Hawn has a couple of questions. Then we'd like to pass our time to the opposition, because we may be interrupted for votes, and we want to make sure the opposition has an opportunity to ask their questions.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you both for being here.

Through you, Chair, to the minister, on the expenditures for the earnings loss benefit, that more than doubled in the last two years, from $105 million in 2012-13, to $204 million in 2014-15. There were a number of recommendations made in a previous study. In round numbers, there were about 250. Of those, 50 were regulatory or legislative, and about 200 were administrative. A number of the regulatory or legislative ones have been accomplished; the majority of the administrative ones have been done.

My question is, how much of that increase in earnings loss benefit payout is due to those regulatory or administrative changes being made, and how much is just due to increased demand from veterans?

[Julian Fantino, Conservative, Vaughan, ON]

I'll ask the deputy to give you those specific details.

[Mary Chaput]

I would double-check for you, sir, but based on the fact that the numbers you're citing come out of our quasi-stat vote, our vote 5, my immediate answer is, that increase you see that is worth $61 million is money that is flowing directly from the department into veterans' pockets. Whether it's a function of legislated or regulatory change, I don't have that split.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

It would be hard to break that down anyway, so it's probably, I would suggest, a combination of easier access and greater demand, meaning greater knowledge.

[Mary Chaput]

Precisely, yes.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Okay.

Minister, we heard a lot recently about the use of psychiatric service dogs, and so on. There have been a number of events in the last couple of months to bring more attention to that, to assist veterans with mental health issues, particularly PTSD. Could you talk about some of the actions we're taking to assess the benefits of those dogs, to quantify what the actual benefit is? Obviously, that would lead to more programs, presumably.

[Julian Fantino, Conservative, Vaughan, ON]

Thank you for that question.

Certainly, during my time at Veterans Affairs I've had the opportunity to speak to people in the clinical field, the scientific area, the sciences area, and to many veterans themselves about the benefits of service dogs to their well-being, if you will, and the kind of support for those who are suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder or some other form of mental health issue. There's quite a bit of literature, actually, quite a bit of information about this very issue, but it hasn't really been quantified in a way that we can speak with authority about the benefits with some rigour, if you will. Obviously, it does provide a benefit to those who are experiencing those particular issues. It may be anecdotal, but for them it's real.

We decided to pursue a pilot project, a very comprehensive study, that will be headed by Dr. Aiken, at Queen's University, and Dr. Gillet, and people from our own department. There will be 50 veterans with service dogs. The pilot project will run for about two years. It will be one of those scientific approaches with all the rigour and benchmarks. At the end of that, we hope to have some clarity about an issue that is very much in a topical domain right now, not only here in Canada, but elsewhere in veterans communities. I feel the only way to go forward with these kinds of items is to actually do something that you can justify and give some credibility to these kinds of programs, so we can advance them, if they work out, as a program response to those kinds of issues.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

A big part of transition, obviously, from the military to civilian life, or from injury to a fully functioning life, if you will, is retraining and a job.

Can you talk a little bit about the retraining assets that are being made available? What have we done, or could we do, to make them more easily accessible or more flexible for the veteran or the family?

[Julian Fantino, Conservative, Vaughan, ON]

We all agree on the need for a smooth transition from active military service to civilian life in the context of a good job, the whole benefit not only to the veteran but also to the family, and the kinds of confidence it instills in people to proceed with their quality of life issues in a way that all of us expect. But obviously there are some barriers and some challenges.

How do you transition a career in the military to some other job? I think we have found a match with policing, for instance. We find that veterans who transition to a police career do exceptionally well. They're highly valued for their skill set. They are disciplined. They have problem-solving abilities. That's why we've encouraged police services across the country to look at veterans as quality people to be recruited into policing, but we're finding that we need to do more to enable them to qualify for those jobs.

If on-duty injured veterans are wanting to migrate into a profession or a job of some kind for which they don't have the immediate skill set or training, there's a program that enables them to do that. There's up to $75,000 to enable them to access one of those jobs.

All that said, though, we need to also ensure that corporate Canada as well as governments are receptive to veterans, that they actually create an environment whereby qualified veterans are able to get into quality jobs.

I'm very pleased to say that we can enumerate for you the number of corporate Canada entities that have stepped up now to actually promote and also recruit veterans into their workforce. It's very encouraging indeed. We see more and more of that happening.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Thank you very much, Minister.

We go to Mr. Valeriote, for six minutes, please.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you, Minister Fantino and Ms. Chaput, for coming before the committee today.

Minister, you mentioned recession in your speech. This is merely an opinion on my part, and I hope you share it.

You know that there are many groups within Canada that are somewhat recession-proof. We know of those professions and groups. If there is any group that is more worthy of being recession-proof, if there's any greater expression of our social covenant, our sacred contract and obligation with our veterans, I would hope that you would agree that our veterans should not suffer. Their benefits should not be reduced by this government by reason of recession.

Having said that, I know you didn't come here expecting to receive softballs from the opposition. I've heard a concern expressed by many Canadians generally and specifically from veterans about advertising. I see from your operating budget there's now a $4 million increase, in fact a brand new expenditure for advertising initiatives.

I'm wondering how much of the multi-million dollar ad buy currently running throughout the NHL playoffs is funded through that item? Can you or Ms. Chaput tell me that?

[Mary Chaput]

Yes. I couldn't isolate for you, sir, precisely the amount that's associated with the portion that's running.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Could you undertake to this committee to present those numbers to the clerk and to the chair so we can look at those?

[Mary Chaput]

Certainly.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Can you tell us how much those ads cost, which currently run during the prime-time playoff slots?