Veterans Affairs Committee on Nov. 21st, 2013

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

The second part of that question is, we understand that when a person calls when they need help, and a lot of times it's immediate help they need, the response time is two to five days.

Is that correct?

[LGen Walter Semianiw]

That's something I have to get back to you on, whether it's two or five days. When you say immediate help, what type of immediate help do you mean? If we're talking about mental health and immediate help, that's available, not from Veterans Affairs but it will and could be available from across the province under the provincial health care system to provide the support to a veteran who might need it. If that veteran is in crisis, it doesn't matter who you are or whoever you call, they'll tell you to go immediately to a hospital, if it's that type of a crisis.

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

So many veterans in Newfoundland and Labrador feel disrespected. They feel that the country they served is not looking after them like they thought it would. Do you think this disrespect that they feel is going to impact recruitment in places like Newfoundland and Labrador?

[LGen Walter Semianiw]

I think it's a fair question. It's something you may want to pose to the Canadian Armed Forces, because I work at Veterans Affairs, in terms of whether or not there actually will be an impact in CA reduction in recruitment, which we didn't see from 2006 to 2010 and 2011. There actually was an increase in the number of individuals being recruited, particularly in Quebec. In the province of Quebec, recruiting did go up. So it's something you'll want to pose to them. But first we'll see if there is that level of disrespect, and, secondly, if that disrespect—if there is any—is translated that way.

[Jim Karygiannis, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I've heard twice that there was an increase. I'm just wondering if the general could substantiate that, because if I'm not mistaken—

[An hon. member]

That's not a point of order.

[Jim Karygiannis, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

It is a point of order. Let me finish. I heard it twice. There was an increase in hiring forces by 5,000 people per year.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

Mr. Karygiannis, that is not a point of order; that's a point of debate.

Mr. Semianiw, we will now move on to our next questioner. The time has well exceeded the five minutes already.

We're going to move to Mr. Hawn, please, for five minutes.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you both for being here.

Give quick answers, please, because I have a number points. There are a couple of things I want to say, first of all, and you can answer or not.

Some veterans are saying that they feel disrespected, and I might suggest that's because there are certain interest groups, or certain individuals in the country, who are making a point of telling them that they're disrespected, and therefore they think, “My God, I must be disrespected.” You don't even need to answer that; I know you agree.

You talked a lot about the extensive consultation with stakeholders across the board. For somebody to suggest that this was suddenly arrived at standing in the front of an airplane on the back of a napkin, I'm sorry, is absurd and theatrical. Again, you covered the consultation, so we don't need to cover that again.

I have a couple of specific points. This is a good summary of what's covered under the new charter and under the old one, and so on. All parties supported the new Veterans Charter because it was so widely consulted on. Even the erstwhile chair, I've heard him several times say—as recently as yesterday in the House of Commons—that the new Veterans Charter was a marked improvement over the old Pension Act.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

I didn't say “marked”; I said it was an improvement”.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Whatever. It's better.

As you know, General, as you and I have talked about it, my issue is access. We just have to find a way, in my view, to make it easier for folks to access their benefits. We're going to have some suggestions, but I want to hear if you have some.

[LGen Walter Semianiw]

Yes, that's fair. Again, that's what I think the minister asked the committee to do.

On the issue of respect, I think it's a fair comment and it's a fair question from both sides. But it takes me back to the one issue I would throw out to all of you, and that is that what we need to do is to better understand what the new Veterans Charter is all about. We need to ensure that is actually communicated to folks who are out there, and that they're aware of what it is. When people say to me that it's complex, I would come back and say it's comprehensive. When it's comprehensive, there are a lot of pieces in there. It was developed that way, which is why I think it's extremely important that those who want to know about the charter and learn about how it was developed, brought into place, and what the charter is made up of.... I come back to this to provide you with the strategic view. Remember that at the centre of the charter is “wellness”, with six programs around it.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you.

Now on the issue of office closures, I just want to confirm that the criterion for closing an office is if there were less than 160 clients. Is that true?

[LGen Walter Semianiw]

Yes.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

And is it not also true—and this is a subjective question and answer—that we talk about deafness or deaf and disabled and whatever needing help, and obviously they do, but most of the people also have families. If my dad is a disabled veteran and 90 years old and deaf, I'm going to be helping him. That's not to take away the responsibility of VAC, but this is just a reality of Canada and families. Family members help. In cases where they don't, obviously there's going to be somebody who's going to be there to pick it up.

We talk about “seriously injured” and all the benefits and so on. Can you define “seriously injured”? Is it both legs? Is it one arm? Where does that term—

[LGen Walter Semianiw]

What we could do for the committee, if the committee would like, is actually provide you with our sense of what that means. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but I would say it's something the committee should look at, given that the minister asked the committee to focus on it.

I think it's an important point, Mr. Chair, to realize why it is that we should focus on the most seriously injured. It comes back to one issue, and the issue is that if any member of this committee were to turn to me and ask, who do you think should get the support that this government and any and all governments have provided, it would be to those veterans who need that support the most. Those are who we define as the most seriously injured, those who have mental health issues, who have lost a limb, who have perhaps been involved in a catastrophic type of event, or who have gone through a lot of rehabilitation or a lot of surgeries. It starts putting a frame around it. But we'd be more than happy to provide you with our sense or view of that.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Can you tell me where the $298,582 kicks in? Is it the loss of one leg, two legs, one arm...?

[LGen Walter Semianiw]

Yes, we can provide the committee with the entire range of all of the amounts and the definitions for each of those and what you're entitled to, what you would have to suffer to receive the $298,000. And just as a reminder, the SISIP, a totally separate program, is also going to provide almost the same, another $298,000.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you.

When people talk about the Pension Act, it doesn't make it right, but is it fair to say that the issues of access didn't start with the new Veterans Charter, the issues of access have always existed?

[LGen Walter Semianiw]

Yes, access has always been an issue, and it's something that as we're going ahead we need to get focused on to a greater degree.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

On the list of services and benefits and so on, under the Pension Act, you have the disability pension. Is it fair to say that when you go across the page to the new Veterans Charter, the earnings-loss benefit is that equivalent?

[Janice Burke]

There is a dual award approach, meaning the disability award, the lump sum, was to recognize pain and suffering, so it's a non-economic aspect.

The economic aspect, in terms of the impact of injuries on your ability to earn an income, is where the earnings-loss benefit comes into play, which is 75% of pre-release, a minimum of $42,000 per year, but also there's a permanent-impairment allowance that's provided, up to $1,700 per month, and an allowance of up to $1,000.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

Mr. Hawn, you're well over your time, thank you. I know your colleague, Mr. Hayes, would not want his time interrupted—as much as you'd like to.

Mr. Hayes, please, for five minutes.

[Bryan Hayes, Conservative, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I don't have a Veterans Affairs office in Sault Ste. Marie. We never did have. Veterans would have to go to North Bay, I assume, which is a five-hour drive. But not once in my two and half years as an MP have I had a veteran come to my office and say, “Bryan, I haven't been able to receive the service that I require.”

I do a really good job of educating my veterans. Here's a slide presentation that I presented at our Legion. I invited all the veterans in our community to come and listen to what we have done, which includes the Veterans Bill of Rights and the veterans ombudsman, the 24-hour toll-free crisis hotline, the community war memorial program, the helmets to hard hats program, the cutting red tape initiative, all the financial assistance programs, career transitioning services, the veterans independence program. We discussed some of the results of our reports and the recommendations that this committee has brought forward, talked about the new Veterans Charter, talked about appealing a decision.

This was incredibly well received by the veterans, and I have to tell you they are overwhelmingly satisfied. I realize Canada is a big country, but I just don't understand how veterans in one individual's riding can feel so disrespected in comparison to veterans in another individual's riding. There's no disrespect in my riding for what we are doing for our veterans.

That being said, Mr. Chair, I'd like to direct a question to Mr. Semianiw.

You talked about the career transition services and you mentioned them only briefly. I'm wondering if you could elaborate on what those services are. Because this committee has been tasked with improving the new Veterans Charter—and we will take that job very seriously—with respect to those transition services, do you feel that at this point in time more improvements are required? I'd like to get your take on how it's working so far.

[LGen Walter Semianiw]

Looking at it from the perspective of our men and women leaving the Canadian Armed Forces, when they're either an individual who has been injured in the forces or leaving non-injured—you have to understand there are two groups—what is available to all men and women in uniform to start with is called a second career assistance network meeting. It's a two-day event. We invite them and their families to come.

We have them across the country. Last year, we did almost 50 of these across the country at bases and wings. We brought in the men and women still in uniform, with their families, to say there are some things they should be aware of as they leave. The Department of Veterans Affairs has a number of presentations to everyone as part of those second career assistance network presentations.

We have part of the presentation focused on those who are injured. They are that second group. If you are injured and leaving the Canadian Forces, you will have a transition interview with folks in the Canadian Forces as well as with someone at VAC. Why? It's because we've established what are called “integrated personnel support centres”. We put these centres on bases and wings across the country.

To give you the synopsis, they include Canadian Armed Forces personnel, return to work coordinators, social workers, a chain of command to be responsible for the injured, and Veterans Affairs staff. They are already working and dealing with them before they leave the Canadian Armed Forces. As part of that transition, if you're injured, they already know who you are. Remember, in some cases, men and women in uniform will not relocate to their last posting, so we need to ensure the Veterans Affairs office in the new location is ready for them. That happens before they actually leave.

If they're not injured, and this is not well known—again, we have it up on our website—we also provide up to $1,000 for transition support for every man and woman in the Canadian Armed Forces who is being released; it's either for how to do a job interview or to write a resumé. Once they have done that, if it's been determined that they need vocational rehabilitation, they'll be brought into the program we have talked about, to retrain if needed and get the support they need.

I don't know if that answers your question.