Veterans Affairs Committee on May 26th, 2015

[Michel D. Doiron]

I think you would have to ask that to the CAF since they're still serving. My personal view is that they would be better suited to answer that question.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Can you explain to us what happens in terms of benefits, not just these new benefits but benefits in general, when a member goes from age 64 to 65? In other words, one day they have certain benefits, but the next day is their birthday when they turn 65 and things change. Can you explain what happens there?

[Bernard Butler]

Thank you for that. Again, this essentially goes to one of the gaps that the committee identified in its report.

What was very clear was that veterans who were totally and permanently incapacitated, in other words, were unable to return to work after they left the military and could not be successfully rehabilitated, were eligible for the earnings loss benefit, an income support benefit. They would receive that benefit right up until age 65, but on turning 65, the benefit stopped. The only benefits that then continued were essentially the permanent impairment allowance benefit and the permanent impairment allowance supplement. Again, these are benefits paid under the new Veterans Charter.

Effectively, that gap, which this committee identified as being a significant issue, is being addressed now through this proposed RISB, the retirement income support benefit. That will ensure that the effects of that gap are mitigated through the assurance of the 70% minimum income based on a calculation of both the earnings loss benefit that was being received and the permanent impairment allowance and supplement benefits

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

You talk about a member who is severely injured. What about those who have a different kind of injury, different kind of impairment, like PTSD for example?

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

Mr. Rafferty, you haven't left Mr. Butler any time, but I know he can be short in his response.

[Bernard Butler]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for that confidence.

It's important to understand that for folks who have PTSD, depending on the severity of it, they could be, and in fact, many of them are receiving extended earnings loss benefits. These benefits equally apply to folks with mental health issues as they do to those with physical challenges.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

Thank you, Mr. Butler.

Mr. Lizon, over to you.

[Wladyslaw Lizon, Conservative, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Thank you to the witnesses for coming here this morning.

Before I ask any questions, I want to comment on the issues that Mr. Rafferty raised about different diagnoses of certain mental conditions.

I also serve on the health committee and currently, we're doing a study on mental health in Canada. We have scientists and doctors coming before us, and unfortunately, medical science is not at the stage where the tests are developed that enable certain mental disorders to be confirmed or eliminated based on tests, as can be done in other health issues where we can do blood tests, and so on. Unfortunately, we have to rely on doctors' opinions and we have to give them credit for what they do, because it's not an easy task.

Perhaps I could ask Mr. Butler, through you, Chair, to finish his thoughts on the family caregiver relief benefit which he was not able to finish, on how that flexibility would work, whether receipts are required at the end of the year, whether the family or the veteran would have to submit certain receipts, or some receipts or no receipts. I think this is important.

The amount is not that huge. Sometimes the cost of caring for disabled persons is much higher than what is offered. Could you elaborate on this?

[Bernard Butler]

Yes, thank you for the question.

If I go back to the original comments that I made, I think the important point is that the thrust of this is going to be trying to minimize the administrative burden on the veteran. Once eligibility is determined—and again, I should specify that the regulations have yet to finalized, and they will be coming forward in the next number of weeks—I think the idea is to reduce the administrative burden and determine eligibility as per the legislation. Once eligibility is established, it's paid as a grant. It's up front, $7,200 tax-free. The expectation is the veteran will use it for the purposes stated.

Again, it has been designed to be absolutely flexible so that if the veteran may reside, say, in Ottawa but he or she may have a son or a daughter living in St. John's, Newfoundland, or Vancouver and maybe he or she wants to bring that son or daughter home to Ottawa to help provide relief, that is going to be perfectly okay. The idea is to make it as flexible as we can to ensure that the veteran's needs in this respect are met with a minimum of burden.

[Wladyslaw Lizon, Conservative, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Thank you very much.

My second question is in regard to the permanent impairment allowance. There are some veterans who currently are receiving the benefit due to their mental health injuries. That provides them with additional support. Do you have the information on what percentage of veterans are currently receiving PIA?

[Bernard Butler]

We should have it here. I can't tell you right off the top of my head, but we do have it here with our December 2014 stats, if we can just find it quickly.

[Wladyslaw Lizon, Conservative, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Maybe in addition I will just ask, are there any limitations or restrictions on how the money received can be spent and how much flexibility is there?

[Bernard Butler]

It's important to point out that with the permanent impairment allowance it's an award paid in recognition of disabilities or impairments associated with severe conditions. In this respect these benefits are paid and there is no accounting for it. It's simply an allowance that's paid on a regular basis based on the severity of the permanent impairment condition. There is no accounting required at all with respect to those payments.

[Wladyslaw Lizon, Conservative, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

What is the amount that is paid? What is it based on?

[Bernard Butler]

The amounts of the permanent impairment allowance are paid according to severity. There are three grades of the benefit paid. They go from basically about $600 to $700 a month up to I think $1,500 a month. There are actually three grade levels. According to the severity of your condition, you will be paid on one of those grade levels.

[Wladyslaw Lizon, Conservative, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Could you explain to this committee how the retirement income benefit works?

[Bernard Butler]

If we go back to the retirement income security benefit, again it's based on a calculation of 70% of the income support plus permanent impairment allowance benefits received at the time the veteran turns age 65.

If the veteran was receiving earnings loss benefits from Veterans Affairs and he or she was also receiving the permanent impairment allowance or the PIAS, they would be added together and the veteran would be eligible for 70% of that amount less income received from prescribed sources. Prescribed sources, as we noted earlier, would be other income streams like Canada pension, like superannuation that the member or the veteran might be eligible for.

In other words, it's simply that the intent of the program is designed to ensure a minimum income level and 70% is the calculation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Opitz.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you very much for being here, gentlemen. I think it's critical that you are.

One of the problems that veterans have often related is just getting into the system and being able to fill out the forms and initially get in there. What steps are you taking to make that easier and quicker?

[Michel D. Doiron]

We have a task force that will be providing their report before the end of June on reviewing all our forms. Presently we're looking at the 23 most common forms, which actually account for 90% of the forms used by the department. We are working with our ombudsman's office. We've asked for comments from the ombudsman's office. We have worked with the Legion. They have actually helped us on working on one of the forms. We will be going out to stakeholders with these changes.

We're not only doing forms, but we're also looking at correspondence and the letters making sure that they are readable and understandable by the veterans and the veteran community.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you for touching on that, because that's one of the things I was going to talk about: terminology. You guys know your file, but to listen to you, a lot of it is wrapped up in the legislation and the words that carry it, but that's not how soldiers speak. You really need to simplify that understanding. This is a comment more than a question. We understand op orders; they're very simple.

The purpose is good, but the whole situation, mission execution part, they get that. I'm being overly simplistic, but I think if some of that is addressed and is provided with some examples, a lot of what you're doing now, a lot of what we're bringing in is outstanding stuff, but it has to be understood for the troops to be able to access it and to understand it and to know which benefits fit for them because this is not a one-size-fits-all, clearly. Every veteran, every injury or injuries, multiples, is different for every individual. I think that needs to be clearly understood, and how they can access those benefits that relate to them, whether short term or long term, needs to be clearly understood. I would highly recommend that terminology.

As another recommendation, the case workers as they come in need to be able to relate to the veterans this way too. They need to be able to speak in language they understand. I think if you're able to do that, a lot of these problems will be resolved. I think a lot of it has to do with an understanding issue, a comprehension issue, as to what's available for veterans. I think that's definitely a way to go.

Speaking of these case file workers, what's their expected caseload going to be?

[Michel D. Doiron]

Once this is approved, there will be no more than one case manager for 30 case-managed veterans.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

What does that mean?

[Michel D. Doiron]

That means one case manager will handle fewer than 30 case-managed veterans.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

So that's a manageable workload whereby when they're working with a veteran, they're not going to be rushed; they're not going to feel they have to get through the process because they have to move on to the next guy.