Veterans Affairs Committee on May 31st, 2016

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Okay.

[Thomas Jarmyn]

There are areas of medicine that I think in and of themselves uniquely require special expertise: psychiatry, neurology, cardiology, etc. Then there are more straightforward medical conditions, which are assessed by general doctors.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

For what percentage of those decisions do you rely on these people being specialists? I should clarify. I was a consultant for a number of years in that area.

[Thomas Jarmyn]

I don't know. We take the evidence that has been put before us. One of the questions we ask with respect to assessments, but with respect to medical evidence in general, is whether the person carrying out the examination is qualified to render the opinion or make the finding that they are making. That is a question the panel asks.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

The impairment standards that are used, then, are basically set out by the board. Or are they predetermined? Are they provided for the two people who show up?

[Thomas Jarmyn]

The table of disabilities is a regulatory instrument that is adopted pursuant to either the new Veterans Charter or the Pension Act. The 2006 table is the table that guides us now. It is promulgated through the normal regulatory process, and we are bound by law to apply it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Mr. Eyolfson.

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

I'd like to expand on some of the things mentioned by Dr. Kitchen. We're both health care providers, so our questions are going to have a similar flavour.

I wanted to clarify this in regard to the makeup of the board. You said that it's not going to be a physician.... It's a medical case, let's say, and someone has been turned down. They've made a claim for a medical disability and have been turned down. Are there any physicians or medical practitioners involved in the review process afterward to say whether in fact they are entitled? Is there someone on the review and appeal board?

[Thomas Jarmyn]

Not at the Review and Appeal Board.

Typically what has happened is that the individual has made their application for benefits. They're examined by a doctor from the department who fills out a medical questionnaire with respect to the symptoms. That evidence, in combination with the medical health records of the individual, is placed before an adjudicator who makes a decision with respect to benefits. That file then is taken by the veteran and his advocate, who determines whether or not further evidence should be gathered. Then they place all that before the board, who then hears the case and makes a decision.

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

Just to clarify—and I'm sorry if I sound like I'm repeating myself—if a physician has seen the veteran and has said that he has this disability, can't do this, and has been turned down, there's not going to be a physician involved in the decision on the appeal.

[Thomas Jarmyn]

No, because these are not medical questions. The question is whether or not there's a valid diagnosis. If a doctor has diagnosed a condition, then that diagnosis, as long as it's related to the record, is almost inevitably going to stand.

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

All right.

You mentioned new evidence coming to light as being one of the things that figures very heavily in appeals. We know that there are problems with the orderly transfer of medical records from the Department of National Defence to Veterans Affairs. You often have to review medical records if someone is coming through.

If there were a system of electronic medical records, would that streamline your process?

[Thomas Jarmyn]

As I understand it, and based upon what I see on a regular basis, the Department of National Defence has gone to more of an electronic record-keeping system.

The question that we often face are these old records from the 1970s and 1980s, like from my own service, which are entirely paper-based. Those documents are being digitized and transferred over. By the time a file gets to us, I am confident that we have the entirety of the medical records, as a general rule, from the individual's service.

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

If someone has been turned down for benefits before they get to your board, is there a time limit on when they can later go to the Veterans Review and Appeal Board if new evidence comes up way down the line?

[Thomas Jarmyn]

There are absolutely no time limits at all on this statute.

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

If someone is unsuccessful, and they've gone through the review board and the appeal board, and they're still unsuccessful at that, are there any avenues after that?

[Thomas Jarmyn]

There are two potential avenues. One is to apply to the Federal Court for judicial review. The second one is the board's reconsideration process, which is an unlimited right that allows veterans who have been denied benefits at appeal to ask to have the claim reconsidered based upon new evidence, errors of fact, or errors of law, and those tests have been set out by the Federal Court, and they can have unlimited opportunities.

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

I think that's all I have right now.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Mr. Clarke.

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

Mr. Jarmyn, how are candidates for the member positions selected on your board?

[Thomas Jarmyn]

I don't know because the government at this time is revising its application process, but what I can say is with respect to the predecessor process.

We have a criteria of eligibility based upon certain types of experience and background, either in the military or in adjudication. An individual applies to become a member of the board. The application is assessed against those criteria. If they meet the criteria, they're then given an opportunity to write an exam, which assesses, among other things, the ability to interpret a statute and the ability to write in a concise manner. If they pass that exam, they then go through an interview process, which consists of the chair or deputy chair, a retired Supreme Court justice, usually an HR consultant, and sometimes another board member as well, who then interview those people. If they pass that process, then they go into the pool of candidates eligible for appointment.

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

Approximately, how many of your members have a military background?

[Thomas Jarmyn]

I believe nine of 20 have military backgrounds. No, sorry, seven of 20 do; four have policing backgrounds.

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

I read in the document prepared by this committee that, since 2011-12, you have been receiving parliamentary budget allocations, which have helped you to operate at arm's length.

Who made the decision to provide you with the budget allocations?

[Thomas Jarmyn]

We became an independent agency, and that's when we began reporting, as you noted, our own budgets. Our budget has been relatively stable over that five years. We have to meet, obviously, our collective agreement obligations, but we've been able to, with a stable budget, provide services on a fairly sound basis since that time.