Veterans Affairs Committee on June 14th, 2016

[George Zimmerman]

That's a valid point.

I ran the chaplain school, so I'm very familiar with how to treat PTSD and how to train chaplains to work with people dealing with personal issues that may require expertise or medical intervention and so on. We teach our chaplains how to work with that individual without compromising the therapeutic or the pastoral relationship between the chaplain and the individual, yet building on that pastoral relationship to encourage that individual to self-disclose.

Sometimes you're successful and sometimes you're not.

[Bob Bratina, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Yes, it's an important issue for what we're discussing here.

The other thing that maybe Mr. Kovacs could comment on is the feeling that their service is not being respected, which often would begin at the point when you're signed off and out the door, as you said. You couldn't have felt very respected that you were a reservist with Canada on your shoulder, even from the general populace, although I think that since the Afghan veterans have returned, there's a heightened awareness of the service of previous veterans. But generally speaking, we're getting some evidence that part of the problem of the veterans seeking service, or being upset at the way the service is being delivered, is that they personally don't feel respected.

[Jerry Kovacs]

I was fortunate because I was going toward something else. When you're in the reserves, you often already have a full-time job or even a part-time job, or you're a student. Many reservists are students.

In my particular case, I might have stayed a little longer had I known what the options were, but I was going on to something else, so I didn't feel as if there was a huge adjustment that I was leaving, that there was this big schism between one career and the next career, or one career and not knowing where to go.

I'll give you an example. I know someone whose husband joined the air force when he was 17 years old. He's married with two small children. He will retire at the age of 42 after 25 years of service. Imagine that, age 42 and 25 years in the military. I asked her yesterday, “What's your greatest fear?” She said, “Not knowing what he's going to do when he retires.”

I had something to go to, so I was in a secure position. I think you can overcome this perceived lack of respect issue if veterans, during a pre-release orientation period, know what services and benefits are available to them.

[Bob Bratina, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

You got right to my point, which is that during the period of active service is the time to prepare for a veteran's status.

[Jerry Kovacs]

That's absolutely correct.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Mr. Kitchen.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you both for coming.

Mr. Zimmerman, you gave us three points to focus on. The third point you talked about was deliverables that support families, and you answered it a bit earlier. That family dynamic is one I'm sure you've had to deal with as a chaplain and you've had to deal with that many times. You did mention about increasing the spousal pension to 70%, etc. We're here looking at deliverables versus that part, but I'm wondering if you can comment more on some other family dynamics that are deliverable services we might look at and a way to have them available in a more timely manner.

[George Zimmerman]

The one that immediately comes to mind is your point about accessibility, so that partners have access to the services they would be entitled to as a family. One of the things a friend of mine is going through is that he's receiving, I think, a week-long retreat by Warriors Canada to deal with an occupational stress injury, and his spouse is involved in that. He's also receiving a two- or three-day service from Veterans Affairs, I think, I may be wrong, but his spouse is not invited to that particular one. Those are the kinds of issues that in today's egalitarian society we need to address. I'm aware that many of these practices and policies were developed in 1952, but it's not 1952 anymore.

Those are two examples that come to mind: access to their files, and more psycho-education or education for the spouse, so they're fully aware of the benefits that they, as a family, can receive.

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

We've heard from many veterans and people throughout our studies about identifying those services right from the get-go, and that's from the moment they sign up, versus at the end, in that last six months before they do it, and identifying as they progress through their career what services are available. Any comments on that at all?

[Jerry Kovacs]

It's good that veterans and their families would know the wide range of services and benefits that are available to them. Some of those benefits and services they may not require when they're released. You may not need the veterans independence program today, George, for snow shovelling and lawn cutting, for example, but you might need it in the future, who knows? It's important for them to know all the services and benefits that are available to them today, in case they need them in the future. You can do that using a wide variety of techniques with today's modern technology. You can have seminars on military bases. You can have webinars. You can have videos that people can pick up at libraries. You can make, for example, a PTSD workbook. This one's for individuals, but you could have a PTSD workbook for family members. You can provide educational materials in a wide variety of ways.

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

Thank you.

We talked a bit about respect and how veterans felt once they were out there was a lack of respect. One veteran talked about sharing his stories, and an opportunity to share his stories, and where to do that. We've talked a bit about how World War I and World War II and Korean War vets tend to use the Legion for that avenue. He's looking for an opportunity, but I think he's looking at trying to share his stories amongst fellow veterans, and not so much sharing them with Canadians. I'm under the opinion that maybe it should be both. Any comments?

[George Zimmerman]

That would probably be left in the best interests of the person disclosing. One would have to ask what the benefit is to disclose this to the public. There may be some benefits for that individual to have their story well known and publicized, or it may violate the sense of privacy of that individual, and they would prefer to discuss it with someone who's been there to get that camaraderie and sense of understanding.

When I was providing that service as a chaplain, I got the sense, when I heard people wanting to tell their story or have their privacy respected, that they wanted me to see them. They wanted me to know who they were. They didn't want to be seen as some sort of object. They wanted to be seen as a person who had done this service for Canada and to be recognized for that.

The other question you asked, about making sure that people are aware of the services and benefits that they are entitled to, is, I think, a very interesting proposal. I said that I think it is a necessary and essential condition of service that people have deep security within themselves of what will happen to them if they are sent into a theatre of war and into harm's way, and what will happen to their family. That disclosure, I think from the get-go, certainly in today's less-than-stable environment, would be a critical aspect, not only after release, but also for a sense of security that this country takes a member's unlimited liability seriously enough to say that these are the benefits they would receive should they be wounded or killed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Ms. Mathyssen.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

You were talking, Mr. Zimmerman, about counselling, and the counselling you provided to CF personnel and their families. In terms of DND, they know, or they're supposed to have a very clear sense of, the service record of the individuals, so that when they pass it along to VAC there are known realities.

I wonder about the fact that the life of a serviceman or servicewoman is stressful, with lots of deployments, and moving from one assignment to another within the country. Did you have a sense, in the context of your counselling, that those stresses created more marital disruption than perhaps that found in the general population? Those disruptions, if noted and tracked, would certainly be an important element of what's passed along to VAC, because if there are injuries, emotional injuries, those would most certainly impact the life of that retired individual five, 10, or 15 years down the road, as well as the independence and the spouse.

Were those statistics kept or does DND take that into account? Do you know?

[George Zimmerman]

I'm digging into my memory, but it seems to me that there were a number of studies that tracked marital disruption among military and non-military. I think those studies or surveys have been done.

On a personal level, I don't know the difference, but I would suspect you would find they're probably reasonably comparable, but maybe not. Certainly the demands of military life, especially tied to deployments and psychological injuries, create huge stress on spouses, and many of those marriages just do not survive. They simply don't survive.

I'm thinking of a friend of mine who suddenly realized that his wife had not been able to sleep for the last five years because he rants and raves, and tosses and turns throughout the night, and she is awake. Suddenly she said that she couldn't live that way, and she left him. That's probably not an uncommon kind of a question.

It would be well worth digging into finding those statistics. The surgeon general would certainly have access to those through the social work system.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Are there any further questions? If not, I'll give each of you a couple of minutes to wrap up, and we'll go from there if there is anything you'd like to add.

Also, I'll stress that we are open for briefs until September 30, so if any of your colleagues would like to submit a brief, they can submit it to the clerk through the website. They are 3,000 words. They don't have to be a total of 3,000. I encourage you to get any other veterans or service providers, and encourage them to present briefs.

[Jerry Kovacs]

I only have three comments to make in closing. Number one, as parliamentarians on the veterans affairs committee, do not hesitate wherever possible, using whatever means at your disposal, to consult with Canadians as widely as possible, especially with veterans who are not members of a veterans organization.

Number two, do not hesitate to look at some of the reports and studies that have been done previously. You have some expert professional staff with your committee, and I'm sure the analyst would be more than pleased to help you find those committee reports that I referred to in my presentation.

Number three, during the past five years I've attended most of the meetings of the veterans affairs committee, and to the best of my knowledge—and please correct me if I'm wrong—I have never attended a meeting where a Canadian Armed Forces chaplain and veteran has been present. George Zimmerman is the first, and he has shared with you today some very valuable and insightful comments and observations that only a chaplain of 38 years in the Canadian Armed Forces could possibly tell you, so thank you for that, George.

[George Zimmerman]

Thank you, Jerry.

My two closing remarks would be this. First, you are Canadians for veterans. I'm very aware of that, and we really don't care who fixes it, but there are some significant issues that need to be dealt with and in a post-modern, advanced, brilliant country, as this one is, surely we can get it right.

If there is anything that Canadians for Veterans or I can do for you, I would be most pleased to work with you as you struggle through these issues. I can do a little bit of research and dig into my own memory and thoughts around this issue, which is so dear to so many Canadians.

When I look at the Highway of Heroes and the turnout across the bridges on the 401 when veterans came home, it is very clear to me that this country loves its veterans and respects them very much. For us in positions of authority not to respect that and to try to take advantage of that sentiment, which is a powerful Canadian sentiment and value, would be a leadership error.

Second, I'd like to say thank you so much for the work you are doing. I know you're tired and I know you've had a gruelling four or five days of this, and that happens. That goes with public service. Your questions and your compassion and your interest in dealing with this issue cut through the politics and put us above that in a way that our veterans want. They don't serve the Government of Canada in the political sense. They serve this country because it's Canada. They rise above that and get on with the grunt. From what I'm hearing from you, you are doing much the same thing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

On behalf of the committee, I want to thank you both for your testimony tonight, the warmth and love that you have not only for our country but for our men and women who have served. We can see it in your faces. We can see it in your testimony, and it speaks volumes. Again I stress, if there is any other information you want to get to us, we'd love to see that.

Jerry, I do love seeing you at almost every meeting. George, the meetings are open for you to attend also.

Again thank you from the bottom of all our hearts.

Do I have a motion to adjourn?

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

I so move.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

The meeting is adjourned.