Veterans Affairs Committee on May 26th, 2015

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

Welcome to the 51st meeting of the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs.

This evening, we are continuing our study of division 17 of part 3 of Bill C-59, An Act to Implement Certain Provisions of the Budget Tabled in Parliament on April 21, 2015 and Other Measures.

During the first hour this evening we will hear from Mr. Bradley White, Dominion secretary of the Dominion Command, and Mr. Ray McInnis, director of the service bureau, Dominion Command, both from the Royal Canadian Legion. I want them to note that I'm wearing my legion pin from the friendliest branch in the region, 632.

We will also hear from Mr. Wayne MacCulloch, national president of the Canadian Association of Veterans in United Nations Peacekeeping, as well as Ms. Debbie Lowther, co-founder of the Veterans Emergency Transition Services.

This part of the meeting will end at 7:30 p.m. We will then have a brief pause.

During the second hour of this meeting we will hear columnist, media personality, and academic researcher, retired captain Sean Bruyea. We'll also hear from Mr. Derryk Fleming, national administration member of the 31 CBG Veterans Well-being Network; Mr. Brian McKenna, representative from the B.C. Veterans Well-being Network; and Mr. Perry Gray, editor-in-chief of VeteranVoice.info. We also have Mr. Michael Blais, president and founder of Canadian Veterans Advocacy.

Are you making four different presentations or just one?

You have 10 minutes each.

The legion starts.

[Bradley K. White, Dominion Secretary, Dominion Command, Royal Canadian Legion]

Honourable Chair and members of the committee, good evening, and thank you.

I do agree with you, Chair, that 632 is the friendliest branch in all of Ottawa.

It's a great pleasure to appear once again in front of the committee. I'm pleased to speak on behalf of our Dominion president, Mr. Tom Eagles, and our 300,000 members and their families.

This evening, we will do our presentation in English. However, we have provided a copy of our brief in both official languages.

The legion has been asked to discuss specifically division 17 of part 3, which amends the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act to add a purpose statement to the act; improve the transition process of Canadian Forces members and veterans to civilian life; establish a retirement income security benefit to provide eligible veterans and their survivors with a continued financial benefit after the age of 65 years; establish the critical injury benefit to provide eligible Canadian Forces members and veterans with lump-sum compensation for severe, sudden, and traumatic injuries or acute diseases that are service related, regardless of whether they result in permanent disability; and finally, to establish the family caregiver relief benefit to provide eligible veterans who require a high level of ongoing care from an informal caregiver with an annual grant to recognize that caregiver's support.

The division also amends portions of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act as a consequence of the establishment of the critical injury benefit.

Please note that our comments are directed specifically to this section of Bill C-59 and not to the entire omnibus bill.

The Royal Canadian Legion is the only veteran service organization that assists veterans and their families with representation to Veterans Affairs Canada and the Veterans Review and Appeal Board.

The legion's advocacy program is core to our mission, and we have been assisting veterans since 1926 through our legislated mandate in both the Pension Act and the new Veterans Charter. Please note that veterans do not have to be legion members to receive our assistance; we provide it free of charge.

Our national service bureau network provides representation, starting with their first applications to Veterans Affairs Canada and through all three levels of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board. Through the legislation, the legion has access to service health records and departmental files to provide comprehensive yet independent representation at no cost.

Last year our service officers prepared and represented disability claims on behalf of over 3,000 veterans to VAC and the VRAB. There is no other veterans group with this kind of direct contact and interaction with, provision of support to, and feedback from veterans, their families and, of course, the caregivers.

When it comes to serving veterans and their families, the legion continues to be the only veterans organization in Canada advocating for and providing assistance to all veterans.

The legion recognizes that progress is being made for veterans and their families in this budget and recommends that the NCVA provisions of Bill C-59 be passed as soon as possible. Is it everything we have been advocating for? Does it answer all of the 14 ACVA recommendations? No, it does not, but it is a very positive step forward.

This bill lays out important enhancements that will improve the care and benefits provided to veterans and their families, especially for our veterans who have turned or will be turning 65 in the very near future. We need to ensure that they have financial benefits beyond age 65 for life, including that provision for their survivors as well.

However, we do have many questions on how the retirement income security benefit, the RISB, is calculated, and until we receive and review the complete policies on the RISB, the critical injury benefit, and the family caregiver relief benefit, we will not see how adequate these benefits will be to our veterans and their families.

Our principal concerns remain that the maximum disability award must be increased to be consistent with what is provided to injured civilian workers who receive general damages in law courts. As well, our concern with the family caregiver relief benefit is that it does not adequately compensate a spouse who has to give up a full-time job to become a caregiver. What is proposed is a respite benefit. Most families today are dual-income families and sometimes that service member works two jobs to support the family, so in essence when he gets injured three full-time wages are lost. We would prefer to see something akin to the Pension Act's attendance allowance reinstated.

As I previously stated, Bill C-59, in division 17 of part 3, does not answer all of the 14 ACVA recommendations. The Royal Canadian Legion will not rest until all these recommendations have been addressed and adopted, and we will not cease in our efforts to push the government to honour its obligations.

We have not shied away from making our stance on these issues known. We have shared our position paper, “Veterans Matter”, with all Canadians to encourage an informed debate on veterans' issues in the future.

I want to address the issues of communications and accessibility.

The new Veterans Charter was developed to meet the needs of modern veterans. It is based on modern disability management principles. It focuses on rehabilitation and successful transition.

It must be stated that the legion, while endorsing the new Veterans Charter as it was adopted in 2006, has also been steadfast in our advocacy for its change to better meet the lifelong needs of our veterans and their families. We all have an obligation to understand the complexities and interrelationships, and to inform about and explain the new Veterans Charter for the people who it concerns. Our veterans and their families deserve absolutely nothing less.

The new Veterans Charter and the enhanced new Veterans Charter Act are comprehensive and very complex. Our veterans and their families need to know what programs are available to assist them and how to access them, whether they are financial, rehabilitation, health services, and/or family care programs. The government needs to ensure that resources and programs are in place to meet their needs and to review the accessibility to these programs, while ensuring that front-line staff are available—and knowledgeable—to assist veterans and their families. This can never become a self-serve system.

Most veterans and their families do not have a good understanding of the new Veterans Charter. I would suggest that this highlights the ineffectiveness of the government's communication of the programs and services available under the new Veterans Charter for our injured veterans and their families. What is required is proactive communication to all veterans across this country to ensure that they are aware of the financial compensation, rehabilitation programs, health care services, and the family care programs that are available and of how to access them.

Lastly, it is also time for all of us to understand the new Veterans Charter and the Enhanced New Veterans Charter Act. This should be a priority. Our veterans need to know not only the weaknesses of the programs but the strengths behind the legislation: the programs, the services, and the benefits. We, too, can help our veterans and their families.

Since commencing our advocacy in 1926, the legion's advocacy and programming efforts continue to evolve to meet the changing demographics while supporting our traditional veteran community. However, notwithstanding the capacity of the legion, we certainly believe that the Department of National Defence and Veterans Affairs Canada have a responsibility to ensure that policies, practices, and programs supported through a sustainable research program are accessible and meet the unique needs of all veterans, with a goal of enabling the healthy transition of all our veterans and their families through this very challenging, changing, and sometimes difficult life course.

Finally, I would be remiss if I did not mention our World War II veterans and post-World War II veterans who are now seeking assistance through the legion for access to the veterans independence program. These veterans are often frail, and they are approaching the end of their life. They are a very proud group of people who have never applied to the government for any type of disability benefit assistance, and now, because they want to remain independent in their own homes rather than going into a long-term care facility, they cannot access the VIP and benefits for frailty because they do not have an established eligibility for a disability or a lower income.

Last October, we sent a high-priority list of resolutions to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, including a resolution that all veterans be deemed eligible for VIP benefits based on need, irrespective of their having established disability entitlement or low-income status. We urge the government to action this resolution without delay. We understand that the response to these resolutions will be forthcoming from the department very soon.

We agree that the passage of Bill C-59, and particularly those provisions that affect the new Veterans Charter, is a step in the right direction. Let me thank the committee for the work it does on behalf of our veterans. The legion appreciates the opportunity to come before the committee to brief you on our perspective on issues of concern to Canada's veterans.

I would also at this time like to extend to the committee the opportunity to visit our national headquarters, which we call Legion House. It would be opportunity for us to provide you with a full brief on how the legion is one of Canada's great institutions, and how we support Canadians, our veterans, and our communities.

Once again, thank you. Merci.

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

Mr. White, I want to thank you for the work that you do. I especially want to thank you for the respect that you have for the clock. You were at 10 minutes, right on the dot, and you should be an example for everyone sitting here at this table.

If it's the will of the committee, we will hear from Mr. Mac Culloch now.

[Maj Wayne Mac Culloch, National President, Canadian Association of Veterans in United Nations Peacekeeping]

Mr. Chair and members of the committee—

thank you for allowing me to testify before you today. Veterans are grateful for the attention you have given to their needs and your work in addressing a number of shortfalls in the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act, commonly called the new Veterans Charter, and its attendant regulations.

The 14 recommendations of your report last summer have provided a significant first step in redressing gaps in current legislation meant to assure the well-being of veterans by dealing with the top issues facing our most severely disabled veterans. While the new benefits for veterans, contained in Bill C-59, constitute another step in the right direction, it is but a small step and does not fully address the long-standing top priorities of veterans and their associations.

To recap, for the past several years traditional veterans' groups have been unanimous and consistent with regard to their top three priorities: the earnings loss benefit must be improved to provide 100% of pre-release income, continue for life, and include increases for projected career earnings for a Canadian Forces member; the maximum disability award must be increased consistent with what is provided to injured civilian workers who receive general damages in law court; and the current inequality with regard to earnings loss benefits for class A and class B reservists, those with fewer than 180 days, for injuries attributable to service, must cease.

Further key shortfalls to be addressed were outlined in the assembly's latest letter to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, dated July 18, 2014.

The provisions of the new Veterans Charter unreasonably constrain the number of disabled veterans who are able to qualify for appropriate levels of entitlement to this important allowance.

The exceptional incapacity allowance concept, founded under the Pension Act, should be incorporated in the new Veterans Charter. This allowance has traditionally addressed the impact of the disabilities suffered by 100% veteran pensioners, with reference to their difficulty to cope given their overall capacity. Introducing the exceptional incapacity allowance into the new Veterans Charter would augment the limitations of the permanent impairment allowance, particularly in circumstance where a seriously disabled veteran confronts the ravages of age.

In order to recognize the caregiving requirements that many disabled veterans confront to cope with their incapacities, the attendant's allowance provisions of the Pension Act should be added to the new Veterans Charter, in recognition of the financial costs faced by many families in this context. The new Veterans Charter should acknowledge that veterans with dependants should receive a higher level of compensation, either through the augmentation of the lump-sum disability award or through an increase in the earnings loss benefit for such veterans and their families.

Bill C-59, as it currently stands, does not fully address any of these recommendations. Specifically, the retirement income security benefit provides for a maximum of 70% of pre-age-65 earnings loss benefit, which itself is a maximum of 75% of pre-tax, pre-release salary, or, when you do the math, 52.25% of the pre-tax, pre-release salary, without any provision for projected Canadian Armed Forces career earnings increases. A survivor would receive 50% of the retirement income security benefit. This falls far short of the recommended 100% of pre-release salary, with projected career earnings increases.

Let's put some numbers on this. A regular force corporal currently earns $56,568 per annum before taxes. The earnings loss benefit would reduce that figure to $42,426. After age 65, the pre-tax amount of the retirement income security benefit would be $29,700. His survivor would receive $14,850 annually. Both of these amounts are well below the poverty line.

Note that these are maximum amounts, and under Bill C-59 they would be reduced by unspecified other amounts. What quality of life could the veteran or the survivor expect to experience under these circumstances? This alarming situation will be further exacerbated by other government cost-shedding actions, such as the current readjustment of cost sharing for the public service health care plan, which many veterans depend on for supplemental health insurance. It will be changed from the current 25% participant and 75% government share to a 50-50 scheme. Where will veterans and their survivors find the means to keep pace with this and other cost increases under the retirement income security benefit?

The solution to the quality of life that disabled veterans deserve lies not in what Bill C-59 proposes, but rather in adoption of the long-standing recommendations of veterans. It is our hope that this new benefit is but the first step towards meeting our stated needs. The Canadian Association of Veterans in United Nations Peacekeeping therefore supports inclusion of the retirement income security benefit in Bill C-59, but calls on government to commit to meeting the full requirement in its next session.

The family caregiver relief benefit is a welcomed addition to the suite of benefits available under the new Veterans Charter. However, at $7,238, it falls far short of a similar benefit under the Canadian Armed Forces compensation and benefit instructions, article 211.04, which provides $36,500. This discrepancy has not been explained, and an 80% reduction in assistance cannot fail to have dramatic consequences on the disabled veteran and his or her family. While the association accepts this benefit as another small step in the right direction, it once again calls on government to adjust the family caregiver relief benefit to the amount of compensation and benefit instructions, article 211.04, while maintaining the current breadth of applicability and duration of such payments.

The critical injury benefit is another new benefit available to those who have suffered traumatic injury requiring immediate hospital treatment. While it is welcomed as yet another small step toward improving the quality of life for those injured in service to Canada, the government’s rationale for this unexpected benefit has received a mixed response from association members. It appears to exclude those who suffer from operational stress injuries unless those injuries are immediately incapacitating. The history of this type of injury generally carries with it a period of latency, thus denying the benefit’s support to its sufferers.

This differentiation would drive a further wedge between those with physical injuries and those with operational stress injuries, both of which have severe impacts on the families of the injured. Previous strides in gaining acceptance of operational stress injuries as a bona fide injury could be nullified by the proposed immediate physical trauma and later OSI distinctions. While still supported, the association would like further work to occur to close this apparent gap.

I would like to bring a further concern to your attention, namely the frequent references in Bill C-59 to “prescribed sources”, the determination of the value of prescribed sources, “prescribed factors”, and what constitutes a single and sudden occurrence. These, and similar phrases, leave much of the value of the new benefits in doubt.

As occurred in the permanent impairment allowance, Governor in Council regulations so restricted the availability of the benefit to veterans, and limited the majority of approvals to its lowest level, that it had little of its expected impacts. Veterans would like to be assured that the provisions of the new section 2.1 of the new Veterans Charter will be amply reflected in the creation of new regulations and revision of existing ones.

In summary, the members of the association support the provisions of Bill C-59 that seek to amend the new Veterans Charter, and urge its speedy passage through Parliament to royal assent. However, significant gaps remain in the support that disabled veterans need from government. The association wishes to impress on all parliamentarians the importance of these gaps and the speed with which they must be closed.

Thank you for your attention.

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

That was right on time.

Mr. Chicoine, you have the floor.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would also like to thank the witnesses for being here today.

Mr. Mac Culloch, your French is very good. It's perfect.

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

Mr. Mac Culloch comes from Orleans. He's bilingual.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Absolutely. I had the opportunity to speak a few words with him, but I wasn't entirely sure. Now we have proof.

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

I'm sorry, but the clerk just informed me that Mrs. Lowther would like to make some comments.

I'm sorry. I saw you as being together.

[Maj Wayne Mac Culloch]

My wife would object.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

I know the parliamentarians are anxious to ask questions, but they'll first be patient and be inspired by what you have to say.

[Debbie Lowther, Co-founder, Veterans Emergency Transition Services]

Well, thank you, first of all, for asking VETS Canada to attend this evening and asking me to speak on behalf of the organization.

VETS Canada is an organization whose mission is to assist homeless, at-risk, and in-crisis veterans of the military and the RCMP. My husband, who is a veteran, and I founded the organization in 2010 after he stumbled across a veteran whom he had served with who was homeless in Halifax.

During the past five years we've had the privilege of helping over 500 veterans across the country. We've expanded from Halifax right to the west coast. In June of last year we were awarded a contract with Veterans Affairs as service providers in the field of outreach to homeless, at-risk, and in-crisis veterans. In the past five years, as I said, we've had the opportunity and the privilege to assist over 500 veterans.

One thing we've noticed is that every veteran's story is different. Every veteran's set of circumstances is different. There's no cookie-cutter solution to helping any one of them. One common denominator we see in our work is that the men and women we've assisted have not made a successful transition from their life of service to their civilian life.

A great deal of effort and rigorous training goes into preparing the men and women to serve their country, and we feel it would be wonderful if they were given the same amount of training and preparedness on the other end, when their career is coming to an end, particularly for those who are being medically released, as it is unexpected.

The reason we're here today is to discuss division 17 of Bill C-59. It's the opinion of VETS Canada that the retirement income security benefit, the critical injury benefit, and the caregiver's benefit are all positive first steps. We do support that they be passed; however, we have some concerns about whether or not they will be the end of the road. It's our hope and our wish that they remain just that, first steps. There is a lot of improvement there.

We feel that the retirement income security benefit could be higher than the 70%. We would like to see the critical injury benefit be more inclusive of those men and women who suffer with OSIs, as these injuries, generally, do not immediately present themselves.

Something that would be nice to see included in the caregiver's benefit would be training for caregivers—and I'll take off my VETS Canada hat and put on my caregiver hat for a moment. My husband had PTSD, and when I was his caregiver—and I still at times am his caregiver—I didn't know if I was doing the right thing. Caregivers need training. They could be doing more harm than good, so it would be nice to see training for caregivers included in that caregivers benefit. Along with the amount of the benefit itself, it would be nice to see it revert to something a little closer to the attendance allowance.

In summary, as I said, VETS Canada does support the passage of Bill C-59, but it is our hope that it remains just first steps and that there's room for improvement. We like to say: Is it better than what was on the table yesterday? Yes. Is there room for improvement? Yes.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

Thank you very much, Ms. Lowther.

We have a half-hour left in the meeting, and I'm going to give each member five minutes until we run out of time.

Mr. Chicoine, you have the floor.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

For the second or third time, thank you, Mr. Chair. All things come in threes.

I would like to thank our witnesses for being here today. You are the second group that we are receiving as part of the study on Bill C-59, or at least the part relating to veterans.

You all seem to be unanimous and all seem to support the provisions included in Bill C-59, which was previously Bill C-58. This morning we heard from the ombudsman and another group of veterans who described this as a half measure or a step in the right direction.

In a short sentence or in one word, I would like you to give us your understanding, perhaps more directly, of the provisions we are currently studying in the context of Bill C-58 or Bill C-59. Are you encouraged or disappointed when you read these provisions? Obviously, this is the first bill that follows on the report tabled almost a year ago now. How do the members you represent feel about this? Are they encouraged, shocked or disappointed? I will leave it up to each of you to perhaps describe this in a short sentence.

[Bradley K. White]

I suppose we'll start it off. Thank you for the question.

I'll answer in English.

One of the issues we have is that in 2006, when the new Veterans Charter came in, it came in as a living document. We didn't see any life in the document until 2011, when we had Bill C-55. When it came in it actually put something back into the new Veterans Charter. That was a start.

Bill C-58, now incorporated in this Bill C-59, is another start, we believe, in making the changes necessary to the new Veterans Charter, to make it a document that's alive, that's living, that's meeting the needs of the veterans at this time.

There will be more needs for veterans as we go down into the future. Bill C-59 does not fix all the issues or gaps in the new Veterans Charter right now. It's a start, and we're positive that this start will keep going. We want to see more. The new Veterans Charter has to continue to evolve to meet the needs of the veterans.

Wayne has indicated that PTSD is the tip of the iceberg at this stage of the game. It is the tip of the iceberg. Latent onset of PTSD is going to happen. We have not seen the full extent of what's going to happen with the mental illness problems we have out there on the street right now. We're going to have to take the steps necessary to address those in the future.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Mr. Mac Culloch, what is your opinion about this?

[Maj Wayne Mac Culloch]

We are really encouraged. These are steps in the right direction. We hope that it will continue because there are a lot of things left to do but, frankly, we are encouraged.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Mrs. Lowther, what do you think?

[Debbie Lowther]

Our membership is encouraged by the provisions in Bill C-59. As I said earlier, we look at them as first steps.

As Mr. White mentioned, the new Veterans Charter was designed as a living document, and we haven't seen a lot of life in that document. It's nice to see some of the improvements being made. We are encouraged, and we're hoping that they are just first steps. There's still work to be done.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Thank you.

It's encouraging, of course, but I find it somewhat disappointing in several respects.

Let's start with the retirement income security benefit.

What is included in the bill is not at all what the committee recommended. In the case of SISIP, the committee recommended at least 90% of the bonus for injured individuals. So it was more than 75%. The bill also indicates that this new retirement income security allocation is 70% of the proportion of 75%. So it's very little.

I'm wondering if you're satisfied with this provision. Would you support an amendment that would be proposed asking that this new income allocation be equal to what veterans would receive before age 65?

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

The four of you together have 10 seconds to answer this question.

[Bradley K. White]

Briefly and quickly, the ombudsman said 90%. The veterans consultation group, which the legion hosts, said 100%.

We have 70% of 75% of pre-65 salary. We're not happy with that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

Before I give the floor to Mr. Lemieux, I'd like to point out that we have some new visitors, including the minister, who I saw carrying some pizzas.

I assume, Mr. Minister, it's to share.

I apologize to the committee for not providing food at this evening meeting, but it looks like the minister thought of it, and so I think you will be his guests.

Monsieur Lemieux.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Maybe I'll just start by commenting. Mr. Chicoine said that the ombudsman had said these were half-hearted steps. I want to clear the record; that's not what he said at all. I have his remarks in front of me. He said:

The proposed legislation represents significant progress on several issues of longstanding concern to veterans and their families. Because it is narrowing the gap on needed changes, it is important that it pass quickly and be implemented without delay.

That's what he actually said.

If I heard each of your testimonies correctly—and I appreciate everything you had to say to the committee—when you look at the legislation itself and the key measures contained within it, what I heard each of your organizations say is that you too support the measures within the legislation, that you too recommend that it pass as quickly as possible so that veterans can benefit from what is actually contained within the legislation. Is that correct?