Veterans Affairs Committee on Feb. 17th, 2021

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I'll ask you another question.

Obviously, mental health issues have a huge impact on families. We know that the number of sessions is limited to 20 for families, which is less than the number allowed before.

What are your thoughts on this? Should the number increase?

What was the basis for the limit of 20 sessions?

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

Mr. Desilets, thank you for the question.

The heart of what we are saying in our report is with respect to the family members who don't have any access at all.

With regard to the sessions that you're referring to and the exact number, I would ask the department. That is all related to treatment that is part of the veterans treatment plan.

What we as the ombudsman are seeing and the gap that we are trying to shine a light on is these family members who don't have access in their own right when their treatment isn't connected to the veteran at all, but it is connected to their service because they are part of a military family. They experience all of those stressors that we spoke about just a few minutes ago.

That has an impact on them, and if their veteran isn't in treatment, then they have no access. How that access is done is up to the department to determine, but what we are saying is that this gap needs to be filled.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Your second recommendation specifically stated that “the department must conduct and publish a gender-based analysis of its policies and regulations for support.”

My colleagues and I completely agree with this. We've made requests to that end.

In your opinion, what's the basis for this request?

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

Thank you.

This is based on the fact that we asked for their gender-based analysis report: to have a copy of it so that we could understand what they had done with respect to mental health supports for families in their own right. We did not receive that report, and therefore we put it in our recommendations. We don't know whether or how it was conducted, and we would ask to see the publication of their analysis in this area.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Jardine.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Now we'll go to MP Blaney for six minutes, please.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Welcome, Colonel Jardine. I'm so happy to have you here today. Congratulations on this position. It is very good to see a woman in that seat. I'm very excited about this.

First of all, thank you for this report. I thought that it was very thoughtful.

In one of the recommendations, the first one, you talked about how the treatment plan “should be independent of the Veteran's treatment plan”. We know that a lot of family members—children and partners—are falling through the cracks. Of course, a veteran is not going to do well if the people surrounding the veteran are really struggling because of their service.

Could you talk about what that might look like? Why do you think it's so important that it be independent of the veteran's treatment plan?

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

Ms. Blaney, thank you for your kind words.

It is so important because military service affects the families as well. If we accept that when a military member serves, their family also serves, if we accept that and we accept that therefore the family should also receive care for their part and what they've contributed to their country alongside their military member, then that is the reason why.

If they've suffered some mental health issues or illness as a result of that service, how would that look? That would be them receiving the same level and the same kind of funding from Veterans Affairs, in recognition that their mental health issues are related to their service as well, and that it is not necessary to be connected as part of their veteran's treatment plan.

It's a very simple gap to fill from our perspective. If the military member has served, the family has served, and if there are mental health issues, then let's meet that obligation to the family.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you. I couldn't agree more.

You did mention, of course—and I appreciate that another member already has asked a question about it—the importance of the department conducting and publishing a gender-based analysis of its policies. I know that you didn't speak to this specifically in your report, but I'm just wondering if there would be interest in the future, because I know one of the challenges is that the majority of single veterans are women. We talk about their support and their caregiver support, but really, until this work is done and it's public, we won't be able to see clearly what those gaps are.

I know that a previous ombudsperson was really focused on making sure that we start talking more about women veterans. I'm wondering if you could speak to why this GBA+ report is so important to share with the public. I know this is maybe getting to be too much, and I really respect that, but in terms of you setting your own priorities, do you see the situation of women veterans as something that you may be looking into? Because I'm seeing a growing gap.

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

Absolutely, unqualifiedly, we're in the middle of doing our strategic planning to set our priorities as we go forward in my mandate. Part of the outcome of that is to determine exactly where we're going and to use our investigative capacity and to see what areas we're going to look at. I can assure you that women veterans will absolutely be part of that.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you. I hope you will see fit to look at the caregiver supports that are out there and how veterans who are single women get those supports—that they're accessible—because I think that in this committee what we all share—and of course, you as well, in your position—is that we don't want to see veterans alone and suffering without any support or the resources to have that support.

Hopefully, this is not my last question, but we'll see. You talked about how the department needs to “continue to demonstrate flexibility in meeting the individual mental health needs of family members”. What does “demonstrate flexibility” mean? One of the things that we're always challenged with whenever we're dealing with people is how to make sure there's consistency as well as enough flexibility to serve people where they're at. Could you speak to that and what you've heard in terms of your report?

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

This recommendation speaks directly to the regulatory legislative framework within which the department delivers mental health support to families.

I would like to ask my colleague, Mr. Schippers, to respond to you. As our legal counsel, he probably has a better set of words to explain it more clearly.

[Duane Schippers]

In it's simplest form, that recommendation is intended to encourage VAC to colour as close to the line as possible when making determinations. Sometimes if you colour a little outside the lines it's okay if the person gets the help they need. That's what that recommendation is intended to do. I think we recognize that within the existing legislative and regulatory framework, VAC is trying to do that. By rolling back the policy and putting part of the new guideline into effect in May, they've moved more in that direction, but it really requires legislative and regulatory attention to make sure that family members get this independent access to mental health treatment for service-related illness. It requires that kind of clarity. Most of the benefits are really linked to the veteran and not to the individual family member under existing legislation and regulations.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Sorry, I have cut that off there.

Now, for five minutes, we have MP Brassard, please.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Colonel, for being here with us today. It's nice to meet you.

I'm going to make a statement more so than ask a question. Then I'm going to be passing some of my time off to Ms. Wagantall.

I've been watching your testimony and listening to you very closely, and I can't imagine a more difficult situation to walk into than the study that you did. I will say this. It's my opinion that the government made absolutely the right decision in hiring you, and I'll tell you why. It's not because you're from Alliston originally, which is just 20 minutes down the road, but you're showing a level of empathy and compassion that is precisely needed in order to deal with the magnitude of the situations you're going to be dealing with, with veterans and their families.

You said earlier on that you apologize for getting emotional. Never apologize for getting emotional. I can't begin to tell you how many times I've sat in this office crying with veterans, veterans who have thought about committing suicide because they're not getting access to the types of services they need. We've all shed tears. Never apologize for that.

I just want you to know that I give you the same advice I give my colleague, Todd Doherty. Make sure you take care of yourself first. Know that we are here as a committee to help you. I am here as a member of Parliament to help you because at the end of the day it's all about helping veterans and their families.

Cathay.

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

Thank you, John.

I just wanted to echo that. Thank you, Colonel Jardine, for your service and for your personal transparency. You're going to do a wonderful job here. As for the life stories you shared today in regard to caregivers, as John said, it is overwhelming at times.

I want to just ask you a question in regard to what I'm hearing, which is that there are gaps, inconsistencies, backlogs and subjectivity in decisions that are made. I really think that a lot of times everything is too complicated, and definitions aren't clear. We hear often about the dynamics around sanctuary trauma. When I met with the Caregivers' Brigade, they used the term “the war at home”. I would like you to comment on that. That just describes to me the very issues that somehow are being missed in dealing with the needs of caregivers, spouses and children.

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

Mr. Brassard and Ms. Wagantall, thank you for your kind words.

You're absolutely right. This is the point we're trying to make, that the people who are the first responders to veterans are their families. Military service takes a toll on the veteran and their family.

We believe with this report and this study we have done that; we have demonstrated very clearly that this gap exists. There is work to be done to fill that gap. It requires some commitment to do that.

If we agree—and I can't state this more plainly—that the family serves while the veteran or a military member serves, and if we say we're going to take care of the veteran when they become ill or injured, then how can we not extend that to their families and do it in a way that recognizes who they are? They are not just part of the furniture and effects. They are individuals, children who need to grow up and who sometimes need help to make that transition into adulthood successfully to become citizens of our country. This is the heartbreaking part to those of us who understand this.

It's heartbreaking to hear these stories, as you could tell, and we would urge the government to please take the necessary steps to fill this gap.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

You have about one minute, Cathay.

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

My goodness. I didn't expect that. Thank you. I never have an extra minute left.

I'm looking forward to the opportunity to work further with you, as John has mentioned. This entire committee wants to make a difference for veterans and their families.

Thank you again for the privilege of being able to interact with you today and I look forward to more of the same.

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

The privilege is mine.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

MP Lalonde, you have five minutes, please.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

Thank you.

Like my colleagues, I want to start by congratulating you on your appointment, Colonel Jardine.

From the statement and recommendations I look forward in the hope of seeing more of this great work you have done.

I also noticed from your statement that some of the stories are largely from the perspective of female caregivers who are calling on increased support and certainly more agencies to request it.

At this point are the caregivers who request assistance from your office predominantly female, and how is the experience of female primary caregivers different from the experience of male caregivers?

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

Thank you, Mrs. Lalonde.

There are two things in your question. Our report didn't focus on caregivers because we were focused on family members in their own right, not in their ability to be a caregiver to their veteran, but to seek and to be given access or funded treatment in their own right, based on their own mental health issues.

At the same time though, I can tell you we are working. One of our upcoming investigations—it's actually under way—is on the question of caregivers. I will ask my colleague, Mr. Schippers, to speak to that because I haven't been briefed on it up to this point.

[Duane Schippers]

Thank you, Colonel Jardine.

I would just say that some of the work we've done in terms of the impact of transition on our [Technical difficulty—Editor] we did a qualitative study about two years ago on transition that showed that the family, and particularly the spouses, are the most important factor in a successful transition of a military member from military life to the civilian life.

We're going to be looking at the caregiver recognition benefit. We've started to look at it and we'll be looking at things such as access and qualifications for access. It seems, and it shouldn't be any shock given the percentage of male Canadian Forces members versus female, that the largest proportion of caregivers tend to be female. We'll be looking at this through a GBA+ lens as well, looking at how it impacts single female veterans, looking at who the caregivers are, who the family members are and whether that is different in different forms. For example, is the indigenous definition of family a bit broader? How are indigenous veterans and their caregivers impacted? We'll be looking at the impact. We'll be looking at the needs of the veterans and we'll also be looking at the quantity of the benefit. Is the caregiver recognition benefit really sufficient? Is it really compensation or is it token recognition while the care is foisted onto the partners? Is it the caregiver's responsibility as opposed to the government's? We'll be looking at those things and we look forward to talking to the committee about that once we've completed that work.

I think MP Blaney had asked about military sexual trauma, MST, earlier, and we're also looking at access to individual counselling for survivors of military sexual trauma and what resources are being provided to veterans.