Evidence of meeting #20 for Veterans Affairs in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was client.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:30 a.m.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Okay.
Quickly, some veterans have expressed frustration about the department's provision of benefit of the doubt. Have you experienced that at all? Do you share that concern?
11:30 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Pensions Advocate, Bureau of Pensions Advocates, Department of Veterans Affairs
It's a difficult one, and I don't know if I can answer this in 30 seconds. In a nutshell, the benefit of the doubt provision comes, essentially, from section 39 of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act, where it says, essentially that the board shall draw “every reasonable inference in favour of the applicant...; accept any uncontradicted evidence” that it “considers to be credible” and “resolve in favour of the applicant...any doubt in the weighing of evidence, as to whether the applicant...has established a case”.
That's where the benefit of the doubt comes from. The issue there is that it's the weight the evidence given by the veteran should be given. In criminal matters, we know that the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. In civil matters, we know it's a balance of probabilities. On the balance of probabilities, it's slightly more that it is so than it is not. On veterans pensions matters, given the benefit of the doubt, the question is where that standard is. We know it's less than balance of probabilities, but it's somewhere between 1% and 49%, and exactly where that sweet spot is, is probably the question. We'd say, on behalf of the client, it's down closer to the 1%. The board is somewhere in between.
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
Thank you for coming, sir.
When the claims involve injuries or illness, how easy would you say it is to get hold of medical records and veterans' files from their lawyer when there's a request? Do you find barriers, or is it easy for records to come?
11:35 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Pensions Advocate, Bureau of Pensions Advocates, Department of Veterans Affairs
The medical service records come from DND. That can take a little while, but it doesn't take as long as it used to.
The real delay is in obtaining medical reports. It may be because of the growing complexity of cases. In the past, the vast majority of cases were musculoskeletal. You had a broken bone, or you had a torn muscle. You could see it. You could touch it. More and more often now, we are dealing with psychiatric conditions, which are not evident unless you really examine the patient. That has led to what you might want to call “specialist report creep”.
Ten years ago, the report of a family doctor was all you needed. Then, it had to be maybe a psychologist, because they have a little more experience in the field. Then, as conditions were identified and became more complicated, a psychologist wasn't good enough; you needed a medical report from a psychiatrist.
That is probably where the system is slowed down the most for the veteran, from our perspective, because he or she needs a civilian doctor. If they are still in the forces, of course, their DND doctor doesn't provide that kind of service. They have to go out into the civilian world, try to find that report, and then get it back to us for redress purposes. We know the Canadian medical system has its challenges, and that is seen, certainly, in this process.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
You would agree that this needs to be improved.
11:35 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Pensions Advocate, Bureau of Pensions Advocates, Department of Veterans Affairs
Yes.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
Would a system of electronic medical records help to speed up the process?
11:35 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Pensions Advocate, Bureau of Pensions Advocates, Department of Veterans Affairs
Absolutely.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
Does your department have the digital infrastructure to receive electronic reports, if they become available?
11:35 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Pensions Advocate, Bureau of Pensions Advocates, Department of Veterans Affairs
I am not sure exactly what the department's situation is. I know, though, that we have to have our own system because of the solicitor-client relationship of protected information. In fact, we are in the midst of developing what we call an “electronic case management system”, which will do precisely that.
It will also contribute to the efficiency of advocates without borders. If we have a file that has to travel across the country, right now we put it in a bag and it is couriered over, which could take a day or two. Once the electronic case management system is in place, hopefully by next year, that will be instantaneous.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
Great.
This might be a little technical from a lawyer's perspective. I am a physician, and I wouldn't be able to answer this from a medical perspective.
In developing these systems, is someone looking out to see that there are compatibilities between the medical records systems and your system so that you could receive them seamlessly?
11:35 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Pensions Advocate, Bureau of Pensions Advocates, Department of Veterans Affairs
I believe so, but again, as you say, that is beyond my scope of knowledge.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
Okay. That would be my answer, if the tables were reversed. Thank you.
We have heard that some appeals that are sent to the review board end up not getting approved. This might not be completely in your area, but do you have an opinion as to how the process could be improved to decrease the need for appeals?
11:35 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Pensions Advocate, Bureau of Pensions Advocates, Department of Veterans Affairs
I can tell you anecdotally, from what we have noticed over the last while, that the system, certainly at first application, seems to have become more generous.
I can give you a couple of concrete examples, one that is more immediate and one that has taken a little more time.
I will use the issue of sexual harassment. Years ago, when someone was harassed in the Canadian Armed Forces, whether it was a male or female member, the powers that be sort of rolled it off as “Well, these are a bunch of guys. That's what happens.” With time, and the sensitivities growing around that issue, both the department and the board have moved along with the tide, with society, to essentially say that it is unacceptable and won't be tolerated.
The other thing that has changed on that issue is that, in the past, they may have agreed that there was sexual harassment there and that it was not acceptable, but it wasn't in the line of duty. It wasn't as part of your job. Therefore, you don't qualify. That, again, has moved to the veteran's benefit, where they recognize now that if it happens while you are on duty, the employer is responsible. Therefore, it happened as a result of duty.
I am probably running out of time on this answer.
11:40 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Pensions Advocate, Bureau of Pensions Advocates, Department of Veterans Affairs
The other one that has changed more recently is the one related to cumulative joint trauma. In the past, the department and the board were always looking for the one incident—the one accident, the one event—that caused your injury. We would often argue and say, “Well, you know what, you might be a tanker wearing a heavy helmet with night vision goggles, and over time that continued bouncing around with the weight on your head is going to affect your neck.” The department and the board have both moved to accept the reality of cumulative joint trauma. They now recognize that it doesn't have to be just one incident that causes your disability but a number of small incidents over a longer period of time.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
June 16th, 2016 / 11:40 a.m.
Liberal
Alaina Lockhart Liberal Fundy Royal, NB
Thank you for your testimony today. It's filling in some gaps from some of the other witnesses we've had before the committee.
I'd like to go back to the workload You gave us some numbers. Some of the numbers you gave us were claims completed, which included departmental review numbers and VRAB numbers.
11:40 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Pensions Advocate, Bureau of Pensions Advocates, Department of Veterans Affairs
Yes.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
Alaina Lockhart Liberal Fundy Royal, NB
Do you have a breakdown of how many of those go back to departmental review?
11:40 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Pensions Advocate, Bureau of Pensions Advocates, Department of Veterans Affairs
Yes, I do. Out of the 10,000 to 10,500 cases we do, we counsel out about 4,500, which leaves about 5,500. Of those 5,500 cases, about 2,500 are departmental reviews, which we solve without having to go to the board. The other roughly 3,300 are cases that we take to both review and appeal before the Veterans Review and Appeal Board.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
Alaina Lockhart Liberal Fundy Royal, NB
That's helpful, because some of the feedback we're hearing from veterans and other advocacy groups is that there's this frustration with the system. Their claims are being denied, so that's another step. They feel that their next option is VRAB, and then they find out that it does need to go back to the department, so I think that's a significant number to look at.
Are you seeing any commonalities in what is going back to the department?
