Veterans Affairs Committee on May 5th, 2016

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

What are your views on the universality of service requirement in a service person who you know is going to have to transition to being a veteran?

[LGen Louis Cuppens]

Your question is best directed to the defence department. However, I would tell you that there's not a soldier, sailor, or airman in this country who doesn't believe in the fact that all of us have to be prepared to fight when your country sends you abroad. Whether it's the so-called non-combat mission in Iraq, you still go there. Even the cook has to know how to fight when the chips are down. If you can't do that, then you cannot serve your country and therefore you shouldn't be a member of the military.

But you'd best ask your question of the defence department.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

You also mentioned there was some difficulty in hiring veterans into Veterans Affairs and with Service Canada. You said there was some pushback from public service unions. Have there been any ongoing negotiations with public service unions to try to solve this?

[LGen Louis Cuppens]

I can't answer your question, sir. I do know that the attitude existed when we mentioned it in the Neary report. Much more could be done.

When I first experienced Veterans Affairs Canada's offices in Charlottetown in the year 2000 when we went on a tour there, about 15 people were working in adjudication; one had previous military service. In the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, one had military service. Elsewhere in the department, there were two on secondment. Today, the numbers are much greater.

That's in Veterans Affairs, but there's a quest in Canada to place injured and non-injured veterans in government departments where their talents can be used. If some of the departments were to take a leadership role like I mentioned in my example, with one veteran per ministry per month to be hired—even if they are injured, they can still do a functional job and a very good job with all their experience—I think it would set a hell of an incentive for the unions to reach out and start attracting veterans to work for them.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Ms. Fimrite, you had talked about a 120-day deadline for applying for benefits. Considering that many different witnesses have noted there are people who don't recognize their injuries right away—either chronic repetitive stress physical injuries or the psychological injuries that they just don't realize are going on, or just don't want to talk about—would you agree that removing this 120-day deadline would be the right thing to do?

[Deanna Fimrite]

Certainly for veterans who have service-related injuries, there's always a back door to get them into a VAC rehabilitation program. Whether they have applied right away between the 120 days or two years down the road, they can still come in and show a service relationship and have access to the VAC rehabilitation program.

The problem with the SISIP being the first provider is that it only does the first two years. Their program is limited. Then if you wanted to continue with a VAC rehab program, my understanding is that you should have applied for that within 120 days of release. I don't think a lot of people realize that when they do release. They just think, “I'm going into the SISIP program”, because that's what they've had and paid into their entire service career.

There are a lot of other areas that have timelines for access that we find unreasonable. Specifically, survivors only have a year in which they can access the VAC rehabilitation service. When you've lost your spouse and you're dealing with young children and perhaps a move off a base back to a hometown, it might take much longer than a year to be ready to start school.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

I'm sorry, but we're out of time.

I know that you had your hand up, General. You have 10 or 20 seconds.

[LGen Louis Cuppens]

I mentioned in our CPVA testimony that you should look at the long-term disability provisions in the service income security insurance plan. It is an impediment to the veteran getting care from Veterans Affairs. I can give you an anecdotal example, but the chair has limited me to 10 seconds.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

If I see general consent, so I will let you have a minute. Is that fine with everybody?

[LGen Louis Cuppens]

I have been intimately involved with helping a number of veterans. This particular veteran was released from the Canadian military with the diagnosis of a mental disorder. The Veterans Affairs counsellors in that region did a super job. They did what they are supposed to. They counselled him about six months before he took his release and they pre-qualified him for all veterans care programs. That is as far as they could go, because SISIP long-term care kicked in. He gets 75% of his salary before he took his release. That is what he lives on. He cannot get veterans independence program services. He cannot get money for drugs. He cannot get money for his wife to take further education so they can enhance their income.

That is the barrier of this mandatory Canadian Forces-wide insurance program. You really should study it. Get the SISIP people in here to explain it. The policyholder is the Chief of the Defence Staff.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Mrs. Romanado, go ahead.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

First of all, I would like to thank you all for your service to our country.

Thank you very much for that.

Every week it is getting harder and harder to listen to this testimony. I am a mother of two sons currently serving in the Canadian Armed Forces, and to hear what our vets are going through is really tough.

In terms of the transition, as I have said before—and we have heard this through many witnesses—when members are told that they are going to be given an involuntary release, you are essentially firing them from their job. Now, if you are doing so because of a mental injury, you are adding to that problem. You are basically saying, “We are going to take away your livelihood; we are going to take away your friends, your colleagues, and your servicemen. Here, you are now being pushed into a different department.”

You have the service members under DND until they are released, and then they become VAC members. Right now, it looks like they fall between cracks, and there is nobody with overarching responsibility to say, “We are going to get you through this. We are going to hold your hand, and we are going to take care of you from this point to the point when you are okay.” I would like to get your recommendations, your thoughts on how we can improve that because, I hate to say it, when they are left to their own devices, it is not happening on either end. I would like to get your comments on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Anyone who is willing, go ahead.

[Brigitte Laverdure]

I'd like to answer that question.

Throughout Canada, especially near military bases, there are already organizations providing support during this transition. People who used to be in the military are working on the transition side of things. They meet with people who are about to be released, perhaps even medically released, from the forces. They assist these people until the date they're released from the forces. It's at that point that peer support workers suggest various options to them, in terms of applying for the services they need.

However, in recent years, I've seen cases throughout Canada where the applications had already been submitted at the time of release. During the transition, the person receives some benefits and is informed that the department recognizes the disability for which the compensation is being claimed, whether it be a psychological issue, post-traumatic stress disorder, or depression. And these cases are growing in number.

We, at Veterans UN-NATO Canada, intervene in such cases throughout Quebec. In several regions, we hold weekly gatherings in the early evening, from around 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. The people who go to these gatherings talk to each other. The people who are already members of our organization reach out to these individuals, who can then gather with some of their brothers and sisters in arms.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you very much indeed, but doesn't your organization's existence suggest that something isn't working? Isn't the government responsible for taking care of our veterans?

[Brigitte Laverdure]

Precisely.

We have four groups here, today alone.

[Denis Beaudin]

I think I can shed some light on the subject.

On December 7, 2010, I came to meet this committee and I explained all this. You can refer to what I said at that time.

DND is responsible for the active forces. When those soldiers leave the army, the responsibility passes to VAC. The problem is simple. Soldiers who are still active are told by the defence department, their regiment, or their battalion that they will be paid during the two-year transition from military to civilian life. However, nobody tells them that VAC will be able to take responsibility for them immediately thereafter.

So the person is in a stressful situation because they think that, once those two years have elapsed, there will no longer be any help. That's what the problem is. The way things really should work is that, when a soldier joins his or her unit or battalion—not when he or she is recruited into the forces, because that would be too early—there should be people designated by VAC to provide mandatory information sessions for them. That way, the soldiers will know that, if ever there's a psychological or physiological problem, they have a recourse. They are not just shown the door, like I was in 1992. This approach would dispel any uncertainty for them. Thanks to such VAC information sessions, they would know what help they can count on from their release onward.

I never got the benefit of a program. DND had nothing for me. I was simply sent home. Fourteen years went by before I was paid any benefits. These days, a person can get help after four weeks. This proves that VAC works very well. There's still a lot of work to do, and there are still many shortcomings to address, but it works. The key is to know how it works, however.

These days, there's a lot of focus on active military who are about to be released. The situation they face isn't so bad because they have at least two years in front of them without needing to be too concerned. They know that as soon as they leave the ranks, they'll be looked after. And yet I know people who have been waiting for three, four, five or seven years, and still haven't received a thing. They are completely destitute, and if we weren't there to look after them due to the fact that someone, by sheer happenstance, referred us to them, they'd no longer be part of the population. They would have hanged themselves.

Do you understand what I'm getting at? It's all well and good to have discussions about this, but everything that's been said up to this point was already said by me in 2010. Can we not make some progress now? Could we talk about real situations? There are people dying, and DND's response is that its statistics are not all up to date.

I'm not blaming DND, or VAC. However, a great many veterans are not being taken care of, and are ending up in hospitals in various provinces, having fallen between the cracks. Those veterans are not included in the statistics. So there's a huge gap that still needs to be filled. VAC needs to provide mandatory information sessions when the soldiers joins their unit, so the soldiers know they'll have access to the help they need one day.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

We have Mr. Clarke next.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Beaudin, given the situation, I am stunned to hear you say that the Department of Veterans Affairs is functioning very well.

[Denis Beaudin]

It works well—arguably, very well—but only if the person concerned knows how it works. As I said, it took me 14 years to wade through, 14 years before getting a pension. And Ms. Laverdure has been working for five or six years so that others can get a pension. People come to us having lost hope, and she takes care of them from the very beginning of the process. She can tell them exactly which forms need to be filled out. Someone who is not up to speed, is sick, and receives such paperwork at home, is going to throw the damn thing in the garbage.

Pardon my direct language. It's simply my style.

[Brigitte Laverdure]

The document in question is 22 pages long.

The first form that the veteran receives at home is 22 pages long.

[Denis Beaudin]

When someone's sick at home and receives such a document, it's difficult.

Ms. Laverdure, could you read us the first paragraph of the document, please?

Have a listen to what the French version says.

[Brigitte Laverdure]

It's the Rehabilitation Program and Vocational Assistance Application for Veteran.

Incidentally, there are three components to the rehabilitation program: the vocational component, the medical component, and the psychosocial component. That kind of thing is already enough to create some stress for our veterans. The French version of the form can be translated as follows:

Active participation is the key to success in the Rehabilitation Services and Vocational Assistance Program. If you fail to participate actively, you might not move forward, and the program might be suspended.

[Denis Beaudin]

So the veteran is threatened before he or she starts answering a question.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Right from the start....