Veterans Affairs Committee on Oct. 18th, 2016

[Wayne Mac Culloch]

The trial was on the east coast, and in effect you were able to dial in to the Veterans Affairs office two nights a week up until 8 p.m. For example, if folks have been successful in finding employment after release but need to access Veterans Affairs services, it's somewhat self-defeating when the offices are only open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

[Colin Fraser, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

Right. What time did it go to? Do you know?

[Wayne Mac Culloch]

They were open until 8 p.m.

[Colin Fraser, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

It was 8 p.m., and the trial, from all accounts, went well.

[Wayne Mac Culloch]

My membership thought it was fantastic and would have liked to have seen it extended across the country, with the understanding that you're not going to get... I mean, for those people there is a 37.5-hour work week, so you end up with, in essence, a compressed work week.

[Colin Fraser, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

Was it just telephone service they provided?

[Wayne Mac Culloch]

Yes.

[Colin Fraser, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

All right. Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

I have a clarifying question. Was that across Canada, or was it an east coast trial?

[Wayne Mac Culloch]

It was just an east coast trial.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Okay, only—

[Wayne Mac Culloch]

It was in Halifax.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Okay. Thank you.

Ms. Mathyssen is next.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all of you for being here. We appreciate your expertise and what you bring to the service of veterans.

I'd like to ask everyone a question, but I will start with Mr. Gannon.

You talked about a shift in terms of VAC and the fact that at one point in time, benefits and pensions were determined in-house, and then it was switched over to Blue Cross, and now the rejection rate is significantly up. I wonder if you could provide a history around that shift. What was motivating it? Why was there that shift?

[Carl Gannon]

What motivated it was job cuts. When you start out as a small department anyway, and you suffer massive cuts pretty much to the front line, unfortunately you have to change the way you do business. We could not do business the way we were doing business.

It was sold, I guess, as a way to improve efficiency and a way to save some money, but what we basically did is give a whole chunk of money to Blue Cross and send the work there, so we're not actually saving money. We just created a more convoluted system that is harder for veterans and employees to work through because we, as employees, have been removed from that process.

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

It was penny-wise and pound foolish.

[Carl Gannon]

Yes.

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

Am I correct that two of the formerly closed VAC offices have reopened? It seems like a very, very slow process. What are the problems that are causing this slow reopening? Does it need to be expedited? That's part one.

Second, we've heard a lot about the 400 new staff, but you describe a scenario of staff burning out, being terribly depressed, and leaving the service. Does that mean that 400 will not be enough, that there's already a deficiency that the 400 new hires won't cover?

[Carl Gannon]

I'll start with that part first.

When your front lines are cut to the tune of about 900, 400 is not enough. I will say that 100%. As clear as day, 400 is not going to be enough. We teetered with the 900. Before we were cut, we were kind of teetering. We had to be very reactive because we were pretty much understaffed at that time, so when those were cut, we literally could not meet our mandate at that time. Giving us back 400 is not necessarily going to put us where we need to be.

On the first part, there were several situations when it came to the reopening of the offices. I do commend the government, and I commend the department especially, for the work they've done in getting these offices open. The reality of the situation is that we didn't own all the locations any longer, so we had to go through a kind of procurement process in some places.

The problem I have with the offices is more that this was supposed to be about veterans. What I'm seeing right now, and the unnerving thing for me, is that it seems to be extremely politicized. We knew it was going to be politicized regardless, but it seems to be too politicized, and the intended purpose doesn't necessarily seem to show that we're meeting that target as of right now. That's just my opinion.

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

Okay. I understand what you're saying, and thank you.

Mr. Mac Culloch, you talked about long-term care. This is an issue that is very important to me. I have a veterans hospital in my riding, and they provide exemplary care. They have understood the culture of the veteran, and they meet the needs of veterans.

Now what I'm hearing, and it bothers me very much, is that there's going to be a review next spring. We're always fighting against the closure of beds, because once they're closed, they're gone and they're not coming back. The reality is that because they're not allowing the modern-day vets, the peacekeepers, in to use these beds, they're empty. In this review, there is the fear that beds will be permanently lost, that we're going to lose an important service. Are you hearing anything of it?

[Wayne Mac Culloch]

Unfortunately, the issue is a bit more complex than that.

There are two kinds of beds: one is community, and the other is a contract bed. The traditional ones of which you speak are termed “contract beds”, which are, in essence, a stock of beds that are available to veterans if they meet certain conditions. Unfortunately, most modern veterans do not meet those conditions, and even if that were to be removed, there has also been a bit of a shift in the culture in that most veterans these days who require long-term care would prefer not to have to move to a large centre where these contract beds are located. They would prefer to remain closer to their home communities, which is where the community beds are.

I know Veterans Affairs is actively engaging the provinces in trying to get a priority allocation basis for veterans to be able to access community beds. They've had more success in some places than in others, but it's worrisome to the veteran community that regardless of the type of bed, it needs to be available locally, and when the veteran needs it, he or she needs to be able to get into it with some speed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Thank you.

Mr. Rioux is next.

[Jean Rioux, Liberal, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for being here with us and for providing all of this information to help us improve the services provided to veterans.

As I said earlier to Ms. Michaud, I am a new member of this committee and I would like to understand the bureaucratic aspect better. I will tell you what I understood, and you can correct me if I'm wrong.

Centres are going to be opened. However, I see that they will mostly be in provinces other than Quebec. If I understand correctly, the Quebec system is slightly different, and you deliver it through the military family resource centres. I also believe I understood that there are three in Quebec, in Valcartier, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu and Montreal. Finally, we often hear that some people deal directly with Veterans Affairs. That happens less in Quebec than elsewhere, since they go through the resource centre.

If I misunderstood certain points, could you clarify them?

[Marie-Claude Michaud]

There is a difference between the military family resource centres—there are 31 of those centres in Canada—and all of the Veterans Affairs Canada offices. The resource centres were created to provide services to military families, but the clientele expanded over the years because of operational missions. We also serve the parents of military members and veterans released for medical reasons, as well as their families.

I am repeating the word “families” because previously, Veterans Affairs' services did not really provide on-site services for families. Today however, veterans are young and often have young children. The situation of veterans 20 years ago was quite different.

As I was saying, there is a distinction to be made between resource centres for military families and Veterans Affairs offices. The resource centres are non-profit organizations, autonomous organizations, that work jointly with the Department of National Defence and now with Veterans Affairs. They provide services to veterans released for medical reasons, but also to their families. Two years ago, they used to come to our building to obtain services.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that Veterans Affairs Canada mostly deals with allowances, reimbursements for various services, whereas the resource centres offer services. People do not have to pay. We do not provide benefits.

I spoke earlier about an employment assistance service. Veterans Affairs provides an amount to allow veterans to access the services of guidance counsellors, whereas in our centre we have guidance counsellors to provide career assistance. There is a difference. In our case, we are not providing allowances, but services. That being said, we are partners.

[Jean Rioux, Liberal, Saint-Jean, QC]

Very well. That was very clear.

As for training, I am a bit surprised by what I heard. Earlier you said that most veterans had a high school diploma and had trouble finding work. It seems surprising, given all of the expertise that people acquire in the armed forces, that they cannot obtain equivalences or a certificate. Could that option be looked at, so that these people don't find themselves at a disadvantage when they return to civilian life? Could the army not consider the experience they acquired in the forces so that it can be recognized afterwards?