Thank you. I get to use my time now.
I have a number of things I want to mention, because from what I've heard from veterans, it's important for you to know. You may know it already, however.
In regard to the lifelong pensions, I'm aware that the candidate in Surrey has served significantly in the realm of Equitas doing fundraising and whatnot, and this issue is very important to him. Our veterans have made an ask here for lifelong pensions, tax-free, subject to legislation to change any rates, and no clawback on their military pensions. I just want to put that on the table today to make it very clear that this is what I certainly hope is going to happen in response to the promise that this government made.
You talked about transitioning into the military and being moved into a hierarchy. When someone comes out of the military, that falls to the wayside to some degree. I don't see that happening in transition. With the earnings loss benefit and the increase to 90%, there was also a change in demotions, shall we say, to the lower people. They are not receiving the same level of increase that higher-ranked people are.
When it comes to the education opportunities, I applaud that after six years and after 12 years, there's this opportunity, regardless of whether you're injured. However, if you are in the military, your boots are on the ground, and you're somewhere between 18 and 20 to 25, chances are you're the one who's going to be injured. A lot of that tends to happen early on in service. Those individuals will not have that opportunity, and they're injured. If you're injured between one to five years of service, you only get the two-year SISIP. The requirements there are not reasonable to someone who has been harmed. That is something that is very concerning to me.
Minister, you said in the House that if you need help, all you need to do is raise your hand. I don't know if you're following me on Facebook, but that really stuck in the craw of people who said, “I've raised my hand.”
You also spoke just now of the benefit of the doubt. We did a major study on mental health care. Mefloquine is an issue in this country for our soldiers. I'm thankful that they've finally relegated it to a drug of last resort, coming into line more with the rest of the world, our allies, on this, but that in itself is not enough. That's like having a car with a recall because of something that is causing death, and you just say, “Well we've fixed it for the future. We're not going to deal with what's happened in the past.”
These veterans gave a lot of testimony at this committee. On the mental health report, none of it was really included because it was considered anecdotal. If you're listening to our veterans.... I cannot comprehend how that could be an argument for not hearing what they had to say, unless we want to just have a whole bunch of people take mefloquine and do a study, which obviously is not the way to go.
We've had so many suicide intervention strategies. The reality is that suicides are happening all over. We need to know the numbers, and we need to know the whys. This is going to happen, even if the government doesn't do it itself. If you want some help with that, I have lots of information in my office. It's time, I think, that we came face to face with the realities of what has happened and recognize that to a far greater level. That in itself would make a difference to these individuals who end up suffering, like Lionel Desmond, who took the lives of his family along with his own, which is not unusual. The mentality is, “I don't want them to suffer because of me.”
Those are issues that are very important.
The Invictus Games were phenomenal. The symposium was amazing. I attended the whole thing. I had an opportunity there to speak with the Minister of Veterans' Affairs from Australia, Mr. Tehan. He talked a little bit about your conversation and wanting to get together more in research. I hope that happens with mefloquine.
That's my rant. There are many ways that I think, when we look at how we're taking care of our veterans when they come and they're injured, that hierarchy cannot be part of the equation. If they need education, then they need education. It shouldn't be only at six years or only at 12 years. If they're injured—and it's not a huge number—we should be doing everything we can for them, and the rest, I believe, will fall into place.
