Veterans Affairs Committee on Nov. 28th, 2013

[Guy Parent]

I really couldn't answer that question, but certainly we can....

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

That is a fact, but that's okay.

One point you mentioned is that whether you leave with a card or not, you're still a veteran obviously and treated as such.

The basic aim of veterans programs, I suggest, is not necessarily to put the veteran in a lifetime of financial dependence, but to enable the veteran to get retrained and carry on life on the veteran's own terms. Those who can't do that obviously need support for life.

Is that a fair statement of the overall aim of Veterans Affairs programs?

[Guy Parent]

It certainly is. Under the new Veterans Charter it's a transition concept in trying to facilitate a good transition—psycho-social, financial, and vocational. That is the idea. Obviously some people will not be able to achieve that.

You talked about lifetime dependency. Of course, that was the old system under the Pension Act. I think what's important also is the people who get injured while serving had expectations. They had career expectations. They had financial expectations, expectations of promotions, that sort of thing. They had the ability with their educational and military training, to actually achieve financial security after retirement. That has to be taken into consideration as well. If they cannot reach that level in the civilian environment, then again, there is an opportunity there to do do something.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

We heard from the workers' compensation folks, primarily in Ontario, I think it was on Tuesday, and they don't give 100% pay, because they have found that to be a disincentive in fact.

You're recommending we go up to 90%, which is essentially 100%, given the things that the veteran wouldn't be paying for. What's your comment on that? The workers' compensation guys, as I say, consider paying somebody fully to be a disincentive to encourage them to get trained, retrained, and so on. How do you view that?

[Guy Parent]

The reason we recommend 90%, which is equivalent to net income before release, is the fact that the family and the veteran are going through a very traumatic period of their lives because they are leaving a culture of being well looked after and going into civilian life.

Before they do anything, as they are preparing for that transition, the first thing we do is cut off 30% of their salary. Obviously that's not a very good thing to do. What we're talking about is the earnings loss is simply the amount of money that is given to them while they are training and doing their vocational rehabilitation. As soon as they have a job, that goes away. They are not given that.

I'm not sure when you mentioned the Ontario workers' compensation board whether this is money they give while the individual is training or if it is compensation for injury.

This is the reason for the 90%. While they are undergoing vocational rehabilitation training, they should have at least the same financial security they had before they left the forces.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

On the topic of training, it was suggested that military members are only taught to kill or be killed, and that they somehow come out without any skills and knowledge, and so on.

Perhaps Colonel Guérin could answer this one.

Could you make a brief comment on the level of technical skills, tangible skills that typical military people leave with, and the intangible attributes, like leadership and teamwork and duty, and all that kind of stuff that they leave with, which in fact make them very attractive for civilian employment?

[Col Denys Guérin]

Absolutely. The intangibles are what much of corporate Canada is looking for as well, the leadership skills, the ability to work with others, the ability to work with uncertainty, and those types of things.

Those who do not have the skill sets to actually work in a particular civilian job because what they have in the military doesn't equate very well, that's what the vocational program is all about, both on the DND side and on the Veterans Affairs Canada side.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Military people are taught to do a lot more than simply kill.

[Col Denys Guérin]

Yes.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Access and transition are two of my pet peeves, and I totally agree with that.

Should there be a closer working relationship between VAC and DND to the point of maybe sitting in the same room, metaphorically speaking?

[Guy Parent]

I'm not sure I want to go there and answer that question, but certainly there should be a greater partnership, I think. The issue of transition is a dual responsibility, and there have to be some programs that flow through, maybe managed by both departments, so that you don't stop one program and start another.

There is the confusion, for instance, between the two vocational rehabilitation programs—different ceiling moneys, different accessibility criteria, different opportunities. Again, these things confuse the individual, especially people who suffer from a non-visible injury. It is even more confusing for them.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

Thank you, Mr. Parent.

We'll now move to Mr. Rafferty, please, for five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you to all three for being here.

Just as a point of clarification, under the financial support options you were talking about, one of the points is with respect to improving financial support after age 65 to ensure 70% of pre-release salary. I'm assuming we're talking about it being indexed. You didn't say that specifically, but I assume that's what you mean.

[Guy Parent]

Yes, it is.

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

Okay, good.

We heard on Tuesday from some very good and experienced people who indicated that nothing works unless there is adequately trained staff available for case management, outreach, counselling, and so on.

You talk about upgrading employment options and those sorts of things. I wonder if you could characterize the state of Veterans Affairs at the moment, particularly in terms of people who are being trained, the programs that are ongoing to train people to take these kinds of positions, to ensure that people have a transition into civilian life. What is happening at Veterans Affairs with that?

Also, I wonder if you could comment about the importance of having these trained professionals there to ensure that happens. It's easy to have not enough, but it's also important to at least have an idea of where Veterans Affairs is moving in terms of training individuals, whether they be veterans who would qualify for that sort of training, or outsiders. As I say, nothing is going to work unless those people are in place and enough of those people are in place. I wonder if you'd like to comment on that.

[Guy Parent]

Yes.

Training is very important. You have to know the programs you are administering, the people you are dealing with, and how to treat them and how to deal with them.

One of the things we found in Veterans Affairs is that a lot of people know their own program very well, the program they deal with or manage. There is very little knowledge of the overall, and this is why very often we've had instances, and you'll see that in our reports, where people have called us and identified a situation where, in fact, we said that there are some benefits available for that particular reason.

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

Is there an ongoing program in Veterans Affairs to ensure that there are professionals in place, case management workers, counsellors, and so on, to ensure that people are being trained and that there are enough to satisfy the needs of veterans as they transition?

[Guy Parent]

The question of whether or not there's a program in place to help people get trained would have to be asked of the department itself. We certainly have no involvement in that aspect.

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

Is it a shortcoming that you have found, perhaps, that there aren't enough people to ensure that everyone is getting the service, and particularly counselling, in light of what Mr. Karygiannis was talking about in his question, the two soldiers we lost to suicide? In your opinion, is there enough happening right now in terms of training and having the people available to make sure that those sorts of things don't happen?

[Guy Parent]

I think every situation has its own circumstances. It's very hard to generalize and say there is enough training or enough this and that. Obviously it's a department that is undergoing some major changes.

Really, there are a lot of people who are concerned out there. We found that the people who are on the front line dealing with clients care and do a good job; let's put it that way. Within the department we have very good cooperation with people.

I think what's important is that anybody who has some concerns, personal concerns about their own situation or the situation of somebody they know, should call our office and find out what we can do.

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

Were you concerned when the closures were announced of the nine Veterans Affairs offices—I think the one in Thunder Bay will be closed in February—in that they were part of that front-line service, that face-to-face, personal contact that people won't have any longer in that area?

Just thinking about Thunder Bay, I think about 2,700 veterans are in that catchment area around Thunder Bay and use that service there. I'm thinking particularly of wartime veterans who need that face-to-face service and who use those workers for much more than what you can get from an 800 number or a website or something.

Is it a concern that those are closing?

[Guy Parent]

Our concern is fairness. Whatever happens, there should be no deterioration in service to veterans and there should be easy access to information. That's an important part.

I'll link my answer to what you talked about before, the training. Obviously if you close some offices and open some Service Canada opportunities, then the people who provide the service at Service Canada should be well trained, but that doesn't happen overnight. Obviously it takes a while.

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

Mr. Chair, I know my time is just about over—

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

It is over. I'm sorry, Mr. Rafferty, but in all fairness, you can't leapfrog onto the next part. It was a nice try, though.

We'll now move to Mr. Hayes, please, for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This question is going to focus a little bit on the vocational rehabilitation area. You made some really strong recommendations in that area, and they're good recommendations.

I noted that you were pleased with the progress so far in this area. You made reference specifically to the minister's announcement in October with respect to education. Specifically the value was up to $75,800 per person. An expanded list of training expenses will now be available for vocational rehabilitation training plans, computer software, e-books. This change gives veterans more flexibility, I would suggest, and one of the things you really sought was that additional flexibility.

I note that Chris Whitaker, president of Humber College, stated:

Humber has been privileged to be a partner in providing our Veterans with vocational training and support. Expanding access to these services is an important step in helping to make the transition to civilian life as productive and meaningful as possible.

Are you pleased with the progress that has been made? Can you comment on the minister's announcement specific to the education component?