Veterans Affairs Committee on Feb. 27th, 2018

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

In fact, it's determining whether or not you will qualify for their services, because you have to deem it service related. That whole process takes additional time, when already that could easily be determined, as the ombudsman said, prior to their leaving the service. To me, this is why we're studying this again.

[Guy Parent]

Yes, but the majority of veterans do not really become clients as they release. This might be an easier way for people who are in the process of releasing. Most veterans, a great majority of them, get out of the forces, are out for two or three years, and then—

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

I understand there is that point when additional things accumulate. I'm talking about the one way that we could make the whole process more streamlined for veterans who are leaving, to have it determined in advance that the reason they're leaving—whatever, a helicopter accident—is that their injury is due to service. Then that would take that step off, and VAC case managers could begin to determine how to best care for this individual. Their injury is service related.

I have another quick question. The parliamentary budget officer has pointed out that only 8% of the $147 million announced by this government has been spent on opening up the family resource centres to veterans. Is that a concern? Does that add to the whole delay process of our veterans getting the supports that they're announced they're receiving, but then only 8% of the funding has gone out to resource centres?

[Guy Parent]

I certainly have no information on the cost, on the expenses. All I can tell you is that the outcome is evident. We have a lot more veterans now going to family resource centres. They're benefiting from the services. Everybody seems to be online as far as where they're supposed to go and what the outcome is. I'm not really an advocate of looking at costing, because fairness doesn't have a price.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

At the same time, the family resource centres that I've visited have said this adds another whole layer of responsibility and expense to them. That's where I'm going with it, so it's important we fund them.

[Guy Parent]

That would be a DND issue as far as the funding is concerned.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Okay, and that was my question, too. Where is the funding coming from? In that case it's DND, but they're servicing veterans.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Thank you.

Mr. Bratina.

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

Thank you very much.

You made a comment with regard to reserve units in the context of 24 support centres, but with 263 reserve units across the country, it's hard to do the complete intake. Would you make some other comments? I have five units in my particular riding. I wonder what other things you would comment on with regard to the reserve units and the veterans process.

[Guy Parent]

Certainly the reservist who is transitioning to civilian life has a challenge as well. I think what's important is that they need the communication, they need information, and in many cases it doesn't come from a source that is knowledgeable, it comes from their own chain of command, sort of thing.

The transition centres that are being proposed now by DND and VAC are actually probably going to help out in that respect, of having some central point where people can go for information and communication on how to best transition. The footprint of the armed forces of having reserve units all across Canada is an important one, but we should make sure they're not isolated just because they have to serve in different parts of the country. The communication needs to be better for reservists.

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

Over and over again we've heard testimony and discussed and had questions from all of our members of the committee with regard to the two silos, the Department of National Defence and the veterans.

We had an incident in our city where we had a young man who did a seven-month tour in Afghanistan. A very short time after coming back he took his own life in the armouries. He obviously had PTSD. It was quite a sad story, and eventually the right thing was done. But it seems that in this case with this reservist there should have been an intervention, having come seven months prior, and then just a very short time later taking his life.

What we keep, I suppose, harping on, is, how can we bring together the active duty experience with the potential for transitioning to the veteran experience?

[Guy Parent]

I think one of the issues there is tracking. Very important in looking after a reservist is the fact that as opposed to regular force members who go back to their own unit within the comfort of their own base, for instance, a reservist goes back into society and doesn't often have the support of their peers and their unit. I think there needs to be a good tracking system there when people come back from missions, especially for reservists, so there is somebody who looks after them especially if they have complex cases. We advocate for all complex cases, in fact, that there should be a follow-up by Veterans Affairs Canada and DND, consistent follow-up to ask, “How are you doing?” two or three months down the road, and that's not happening. I think the tracking and peer support are important.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Great. Thank you.

That ends our speed day today and I'd like to thank both of you. If there is anything you'd like to elaborate on some of the questions, you can add to it and get it to the clerk.

I do apologize, and I'd like to thank the members for their co-operation today.

I'd like to recess and clear the room as quickly as possible so we can get the next witnesses up and get that done.

I will adjourn for 30 seconds. If there is any conversation, could you take it out to the hallway and we'll start in one minute.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

For the second panel we have Dave Bona, Teresa Untereiner, and Jenny Migneault. Thank you.

We're going to start with testimony from Mr. Bona and then we'll skip to Jenny, and go from there.

The floor is yours.

[Dave Bona, As an Individual]

Hello.

I'll begin by explaining what I've been doing since the last time I testified. Directly as a result of the media attention I received the last time I testified, a lot of people have been reaching out to me. In this past year and a bit, I've talked to well over 100 veterans and civilians, not just from Canada but also the States, Australia, Ireland, England, and New Zealand.

What has emerged is that there's an actual pattern to the injury from those who've been poisoned by mefloquine. First and foremost, they have PTSD that is resistant to treatment. Second, they have gut issues, balance and dizziness issues, tinnitus, body temperature regulation issues, numbness and tingling in the extremities, sensitivity to light, and extreme, extreme difficulty in moderating moods. All of these injuries are indicative of a brain stem injury.

We have found that for the majority of these individuals, because of the degenerative nature of their injury, a lot of their severe symptoms are not apparent, if they're not identified early on in their career and the individuals are medically released, until post-release. A lot of their symptoms are manifesting in extreme ways that basically prevent them from accessing even basic health care.

I'll used Claude as an example. He has severe difficulty moderating his moods. He cannot even be in a crowded and busy doctor's office. He's unable to access basic Veterans Affairs services because of the nature of the injury from the mefloquine. He gets worked up around a lot of people. By the time he gets in to see the doctor, he's not able to articulate what his needs are because he's so worked up. If the doctor is very contrary, is not open to a suggestion on what possibly could be wrong with Claude, and recommends that Claude do neuropsychiatric medication or go see a psychiatrist or something like this, Claude gets really worked up.

I also had this problem. I fired I think five family doctors because they tried to push medications at me and tried to do the neuropsychiatric thing. I finally found a doctor who could actually do the paperwork and would listen to what I was saying.

This injury is part and parcel of this whole transition. We've poisoned probably well over.... We've given this drug to 40,000 Canadian soldiers. A lot of the studies are indicating that up to 74% of those people who have taken this drug have actually been injured by this drug.

To give you an example of that, one of our strongest civilian advocates committed suicide on January 2. She had reached out to me in the past because she was severely struggling with the severe depression associated with mefloquine poisoning. She constantly asked me how I was able to keep my head above water, how I was able to keep moving forward.

She didn't quite make it.

I'll leave it at that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Thank you.

We'll start with our first round of three minutes, Mr. Kitchen.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, and good to see you again, Dave. Thank you for coming.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Yes, I'm sorry.

I apologize, Jenny.

[Jenny Migneault, As an Individual]

I'm used to it. I'm being ignored again.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

We'll reel that back in. Jenny, welcome here, and I do apologize. Please start with your testimony. The floor is yours.

[Jenny Migneault]

Thank you for this opportunity to be heard.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

It's the first time I've ever done that. I apologize.

[Jenny Migneault]

As a vet's spouse and a caregiver, I used to feel that I was nothing, but because the parliamentary system has turned our veterans and their families into political issues and is treating them as such, I've become a jack of all trades of advocacy.

I'm here today representing myself. Although I am a member of the VAC family advisory committee. I am also a blogger on 45eNord.ca, a public speaker, an advocate in English and a militante in French. I support, defend, promote, and attack causes rather than people, including JPSU, medical cannabis, caregiving, PTSD, and political situations of caregivers, all topics that have a connection or impact on families.

Since my chase after ex-minister Fantino in 2014, my life is not the same. I'm now a grandmother. My ex-husband and I are divorced, and in some ways, I am still his caregiver. Following our separation, like many vet spouses I know, unfortunately, I became homeless myself. So I made the decision to live in my car and to do a cross-country tour from Newfoundland to Vancouver Island. For six months, I met people, and visited organizations, etc., allowing me to start my own healing process and develop a much wider perspective about the many challenges veterans and their families are confronted with culturally, socially, and geographically speaking.

Finally, I'm now sharing my life with a veteran, also with PTSD, whose last name is, believe it or not, Fantini. I'm still a vet's spouse and a caregiver. The transitioning process never ends because they never become civilians again. A caregiver can be the best ally or the worst enemy to someone who's suffering. The political battle of families and caregivers is about having their identity valued and their dignity respected through support, financial recognition, and education. The collective efforts of the past few years generated a political love and a national recognition that was felt all over the country. A VAC family committee was created. More programs dedicated to families, including children, the forgotten of the forgotten—do I have to say it—were developed, and books were published. MFRCs became more accessible, and more research was done on caregivers who were also generally speaking more included, for instance, at the OSI clinics.

Because we were heard, we became better caregivers. There's still a lot of work to be done but also we were able to better protect ourselves and our families from the collateral damage.

So the new measure that will come into effect this April allowing a caregiver to receive $1,000 in his or her own name is a major political win on paper. It's a positive game-changer for many families, if it's accessible. So in the end, veterans and their families share the most important barrier preventing them from moving forward positively, that barrier being VAC with its own bureaucratic and schizophrenic way to love.

For example, take medical cannabis, a medication. On one hand, VAC makes it available, and for at least 7,000 veterans in this country, it seems to be working. On the other hand, VAC penalizes the veterans and their families with decisions that are truly hurtful, with no consideration for the pain, the impact on the quality of life, and the costs they have to pay for their medication. Everything that concerns the process of the exemption letters for medical cannabis is a shame.

Do you realize that on top of finding the one person among the three or four Canadians who can satisfy Veterans Affairs by writing an exemption letter, you have to fulfill the ridiculous and complicated requirements, and this veteran, after providing all the paperwork, will still have to wait between three to six months before he receives his approval?

In the meantime, some veterans pay more than $1,000 monthly to be able to have their medication that was prescribed and that they need. Do you think pills are that complicated? The answer is no.

So behind each delay, deny, and die, there is a name.

For each file, there is a person who has the power to make time either a powerful healer or a very silent killer. Who should be held accountable for the pain: VAC as an entity, or the people who come here at every Parliamentary session to tell you what you want to hear? To be honest, I don't think you realize the power that one single person working for VAC can have on a veteran's life and his family. Sometimes the barriers are closer to home than we think, and the situation keeps being ignored.

I will give you one example. The OSI clinics in Montreal and Quebec are known to penalize veterans who choose medical cannabis. Veterans will be kicked out of the clinic with no resources, and in some cases their driver's licence will be revoked. I've heard and know of at least 17 of them. There is a problem there.

Who will stand up for these veterans? Does anybody care about their transitioning? Medical cannabis works for them, yet within the system they are all being penalized and psychiatrists are untouchable in this matter.

Two weeks ago, I represented a veteran at his first appeal for his sleep apnea at the VRAB. I represented the veteran. To make a long story short, the veteran had to wait five years before he was able to gather all the paperwork to prove his condition. You have to wait in the provincial health system for five years to be tested. In 2016, the VAC pension agent received all the paperwork proving the existence of the condition, and the confirmation of two doctors who made the connection between the sleep apnea and the PTSD.

The VAC pension agent didn't seem to think it was enough, because she asked for another medical consultant hired by VAC. What do you think this person said: “Well, of course, it's not related.” After I'm done speaking, I will share with you the decision, because I have it. This single decision was made by a medical consultant who never met the client. That person has a lot of power. It means years of waiting for a veteran to fight a ridiculous system that doesn't make sense.

Would you also tell my why Veterans Affairs requires that a veteran who wants an exemption letter must meet face to face with the specialist, and yet they can ask a medical consultant who never meets the veteran for their opinion and that's good enough? This is schizophrenic.

Finally, because I only have five minutes, sometimes the barriers come from the provinces. I know you don't have much power, but in Quebec things are sometimes very particular when it comes to our veterans. For instance, recently a veteran won a legal battle against Revenue Quebec, which is not respecting the Canadian law by forcing a certain category of veterans to pay public insurance plan for prescription drugs. In fact, to this day, Revenue Quebec still doesn't care about the judgment. Who will stand up for the veterans of Quebec who are concerned?

Once again, I will provide you with the paper. There are two things: an article I wrote about this veteran, and also an article that was published last December about the psychiatrist at the OSI clinic of Quebec, who says very openly that they are against medical cannabis.

Barriers are mostly political, if you ask me, when it comes to transitioning. There are countless stories that keep coming my way—Dave is hearing them every day, I'm sure—and five minutes is not enough to talk about the barriers.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Neil Ellis]

Mr. Kitchen, three minutes.