Veterans Affairs Committee on April 23rd, 2015

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

To me it just seems simple. You have them sign a release so when they leave this information can move forward. Why wouldn't that be standard protocol?

[Guy Parent]

As I mentioned before, there are I think up to 10 different consent forms right now that people have to fill out so that everybody is involved and the integration knows about the circumstances. Yet we know for a case of PTSD, psychological injury, that if you have to repeat your story consistently that is also sometimes a trigger. This is why, when we have files that we need to send to DND, we can do a hot transfer and we explain the facts to the DND ombudsman as opposed to having the individual repeat his story.

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

Thank you kindly, Mr. Parent.

Mr. Hawn.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you very much.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr. Parent, for the work that you and Ms. Squire do for our veterans. We much appreciate it.

Just following up on that last point. Is it not true now that medical files are passed when the member departs, so at VAC there shouldn't be as much of a gap in understanding what the person is being released for? Is that a fair statement?

[Guy Parent]

I believe they're going to a digitized system eventually and I think the priority will be to medically release. So yes, eventually it will be a fairly simple task. But again it's not just passing the file, it's the acceptance of the evidence.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

But coordination is going on between VAC and DND to harmonize the understanding of a medical condition.

[Guy Parent]

Yes, action is being taken on that.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

You mentioned that only those medically released CAF members with significant medical employment limitations are posted to the JPSU. Who should be posted to the JPSU, all veterans or should the threshold of medical necessity just be lowered?

[Guy Parent]

That's a very good question, but I don't think it's the JPSU as a unit that's important. It's the process within, because there is assistance.

I also made the statement that maybe all medically released personnel should have some kind of a transition plan or coordination opportunity, which they don't now. It's because the people who have a non-complex situation are simply being released and there is no real issue about transition. They stay within their unit until they're released. They're not necessarily posted to a JPSU.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

So there should be more people...?

[Guy Parent]

Or a transition process of some sort so they could go to JPSUs and get some kind of a coordinated and planned transition.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

On the issue that was just brought up I think by Mr. Valeriote or maybe you mentioned it, Ombudsman, of repeating for the system what somebody's condition is, I think that was misunderstood.

This is the 11-page medical questionnaire “Activities of daily living” and I'm sure you're familiar with it. It's available online. It's a long questionnaire. It really is designed to ask if your condition is getting better or worse, if your treatment is still appropriate, and if there is more we need to do. It's not designed for a person with a particular injury. It's designed for veterans who are receiving treatment of some kind, writ large.

Nowhere in here does it ask if anybody's limbs have grown back or not. If I understand, it's the sensitivity of some people to questions. They might read something into the question. Does the form need to be simplified down to three or four questions? For example, “How's it going?"or “Is there more we can do?”

[Guy Parent]

I believe the department is working on a plan now. I know for sure on the veterans independence program, for instance, that rather than having to fill out complex forms, we'll simply contact the individual and ask if there are any changes.

I think we have to understand that a lot of it is culture. It came from years ago when people were on the one-year disability pension for life and then people had to confirm they were still alive and that their condition didn't worsen so they could meet their needs. That's why it was implemented. Now maybe that's gone a little too far, but there's a move afoot now to simplify that and certainly to move it to three years instead of one year to facilitate it.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Simple is good, but the whole intent of the forms and the process is to make sure that the treatment is still appropriate.

[Guy Parent]

That the needs are still being met, I think that's the best way to describe it.

[Sharon Squire, Deputy Veterans Ombudsman, Executive Director Operations, Office of the Veterans Ombudsman]

We've been asked to participate with the department on the letters and forms review, to try to help make them simple and to make recommendations.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Good. Thank you.

Just quickly, the stakeholder summit was held last week; I know you were there. I mentioned this also to the Treble Victor and Wounded Warriors folks. In your view, what was the result of that, broadly speaking, in terms of getting those kinds of groups together? It's not to meld them into one, but it's to understand what's going on in the broad scope of “If I can't provide it, maybe somebody else can”.

What was the result of that whole summit?

[Guy Parent]

I would say that it was one of the best get-togethers I've seen in the veterans community. I think the acceptance of the social media groups that are not necessarily membership-type organizations was a good move. People were generally very pleased with the discussions that took place. Everybody was able to put forward their intent, and their vision of the veterans of the future, which was good. We still don't have the minutes or the records of discussion for that meeting, but overall I must say it was certainly well received.

There's also the fact that, as was mentioned earlier, recognizing that there are many different groups, the people who try to support the veterans community through campaigns, charitable donations, and that sort of thing were not excluded. A discussion will take place with them later on.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Good.

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

Thank you, Mr. Parent.

I have a little note here, written by the Honourable Diane Ablonczy, that says, “If drafted, I will serve.”

You are being drafted—for three minutes.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

All right. That's great.

Mr. Parent and Ms. Squire, in my business we have to make a quick judge of people. My assessment is that you have a genuine heart for the work you do. This is not a bureaucratic exercise to you. I just want to compliment you on that. I haven't been to this committee ever before, but I'm very respectful of what you're doing.

With respect to the privacy issue, I'm wondering why there couldn't just be a form where the forces member says, for instance, in part A, I authorize my personal information to be used, and in part B, I authorize my personal information to be used by other departments and agencies.

I mean, isn't that a simple thing to fix?

[Guy Parent]

Yes. In fact it's a good comment. The work to date on the joint review of the transition process with the DND ombudsman leads us to that conclusion. It will probably be one of our recommendations to have one consent form that is all-encompassing.

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Who has to make it so?