Veterans Affairs Committee on May 28th, 2021

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

Thank you, Chair.

I thank the witnesses.

I'll come to you first, Mr. Ralph. I'm really concerned about the end-user, who is the veteran. I'm just wondering if you have any specific thoughts about how the lack of national standards in Canada impacts the end-user, who is the veteran.

[Capt(N) (Ret'd) Philip Ralph]

It impacts directly in two ways. One, it adds undue confusion for a veteran who is already struggling with mental health issues. They are out there and shouldn't have to do their own shopping, shall we say, to try to figure out which program is going to meet their needs.

There needs to be some kind of objective standard so that, when a veteran is in need and their clinician has identified that a service dog would be helpful for them, they can go to a trusted source. That source would be connected to standards. There is no other way to line it up on a national basis.

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

Thank you.

If I could come to you, Ms. Dell and Ms. Chalmers, I'm a little concerned about your testimony. I just want to make sure I got it right.

What I heard was that you were not sure that there should be standardization, that there's a lack of consensus and that the dogs “are not doing standardized jobs”. However, I've heard from veterans—and you talked about it in your testimony—who can't find a place to live because renters won't accept their service dog. I've talked to veterans who have received service dogs, but didn't get the supports and it fell apart. Sometimes the dog suffers. Sometimes the veteran suffers. I have talked to veterans who have been scammed. They get a dog that they've been told is trained and it is not trained at all.

To me, national standards is a huge part of the solution. If we don't have that.... I understand these are unique jobs. I don't know how we could ever sort of pinpoint it, because the veterans' experiences are so different.

I'm just wondering if you could clarify that for me.

[Dr. Colleen Anne Dell]

I'll start.

We are not saying not to have national standards at all. We're saying it's complex and that if we were going to create these standards, we'd also have to know what jobs these dogs are doing. You can go to one service dog organization where you get a dog and you don't do any of the training at all. You get a dog that has technical skills and hopefully you develop a bond with it.

On the other hand, you can go to an organization where you train the dog itself. You can see the difference. One is about technical skills and one is about the human-animal connection plus the technical skills.

What are these standards for? Is it just the obedience part of the dog? Do we also want to do standards that talk about that connection with the dog and the mental health part of the organizations that are doing the training?

No, we absolutely need standards. We're not saying that. It is complex and we realize there is not one way these dogs are trained. The programs are so diverse in how they approach it.

I don't have the answer to that, but that has to be recognized.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you.

I'm afraid that's time, MP Blaney.

Up next we have MP Brassard for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I really am sad that we had such technical issues in the beginning. We are getting some tremendously valuable information here and it's too bad. I would encourage all of you who are on the panel today that if you do miss something during the course of not just your testimony but also the question and answer period and you feel compelled to send it to the committee, please do send it to the clerk.

Darlene, I want to focus on you. Phil, you might want to jump in on this.

Darlene, you said something interesting, which was that leadership is needed with respect to a national standard because you feel that there is a void there. We're all aware of what happened with the CGSB and how the movement toward a national standard effectively collapsed because there was a diversity of opinion.

For Darlene and Phil, if that leadership is needed, in your opinion, who needs to take that lead?

[Dr. Darlene Chalmers]

Certainly the government needs to be involved as part of this. We're really looking to those service dog organizations that can contribute and participate as part of the development of those standards. Those individuals or organizations that have that expertise can certainly provide input and guidance around what will be needed in order to have a national standard that will be fit for service dog organizations and that service dog organizations will adhere to.

There has to be a commitment. There has to be buy-in from organizations, for sure.

I'll pass it to Phil.

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

Phil, let me start by saying that one of the things that is widely recognized within the committee is the standard that Wounded Warriors uses for their dogs, as well.

Is this the kind of thing where perhaps Wounded Warriors could take the lead on developing a national service standard?

I do have one more question for Colleen, so if you could keep it short for me there, Phil, I'd appreciate it.

[Capt(N) (Ret'd) Philip Ralph]

I wouldn't say what we have published, and it's clearly available on our website, is the 100% solution.

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

It's a good solution.

[Capt(N) (Ret'd) Philip Ralph]

It's a great place to start, and it's certainly a lot better than what we have right now. To the two professors' point, it is a lot of task-based stuff but they are programs.

In order to be accredited...and I thought I'd bring this as an illustration. This is one of our program's submissions for trying to become a Wounded Warriors Canada service dog provider. It's not just about the tasks. It's about the things the professors mentioned, which are very important, regarding the care and welfare of the dog. It has to be part of the overall umbrella of the standards. It must also include the mental health component. It is a requirement for all of our providers to have a mental health provision.

We also supplement what the organizations have with our expertise from our other clinical programs to provide training for our service dog providers, so that they have the proper background in mental health because that is very important. It is ultimately about that human-animal bond—the handler and the dog, together, making that difference in the veteran and first responder's life.

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

If any point has been made clear today, and the point has been emphasized by veterans I have spoken to, it is precisely that, the human-animal bond.

[Capt(N) (Ret'd) Philip Ralph]

The government has to take the lead. That's the only way. That's the only way that standards work.

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

Thank you, Phil. Good to see you again, by the way.

In the minute I have left, Colleen, and perhaps Darlene, do you see a need for accessibility standards apart from training standards?

[Dr. Colleen Anne Dell]

I'm going to answer that with what Philip was saying. Staff need to be trained in mental health. With our SUAP grant right now, we've trained 30 service dog organization staff in peer support with mental health innovations. We've been evaluating that. We've had them all take mental health first aid from the Canadian Mental Health Association.

Those are the types of things. I don't know if this is answering your question, but that has to be part of that standard process too. It's not just about training that dog and handing that dog over. It's about that veteran being part of the peer support group.

You heard of the fire buddy earlier. A different term may have been used. We use fire buddy a lot. That is what that dog becomes, as well as the group that the people are with. We have seen the ability to do that now online, which has been really challenging during the pandemic, but we've also been able to go online and do some of that.

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

Thank you to all of the witnesses today. This has been valuable. I wish we had more time. Thank you for your time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you, MP Brassard.

Up next, for five minutes, we have MP Casey.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I am going to start with Mr. Ralph.

In your opening remarks, Mr. Ralph, you set out three key principles that were in place to determine who is funded by Wounded Warriors Canada.

Can you repeat the first one, please?

[Capt(N) (Ret'd) Philip Ralph]

The first one is the national standards that we have, or the Wounded Warriors Canada standards. You have to train your dog to these standards in order to even be considered. That's just step one.

We have a three-phase vetting process. The first phase looks, first of all, at governance and financials and all the things for a service dog organization, such as whether it is a stable, reliable organization. Then the providers have to demonstrate a willingness to work in a collegial manner with other service dog providers, which, sadly, lacks sometimes in some areas of the space—not in all areas but in some. One service dog provider is never going to be able to supply the needs of this nation. We need to work collaboratively with one another.

Phase two looks at the service dog training itself and what goes into it. It also looks at the mental health training component. Beyond mental health training, do they understand the effects of trauma? It's a lot different from just general mental health awareness. Do they understand the uniqueness of veteran or first responder culture? It is a unique way of thinking and a unique culture, which informs how you train the dog, how the dogs are paired and the care you provide for the veteran and the dog afterwards, with all the follow-up, etc.

Then, in phase three, we conduct site visits and talk to graduates of their programs. Part of the ongoing thing about what we do is that once somebody is funded, they first become a probationary recipient of funds. We see how the first phase of funding goes and follow their program, but the great resource is that, on a monthly basis, we have a call much like this—a Zoom call right across the country—in which our service dog providers who are part of our team talk to each other. They talk about any problems that have come up and any challenges or something they've seen that probably another service dog provider has already encountered, especially if they're a more mature service dog provider and have had a lot more experience. They discuss questions such as transitioning to successor dogs and all the kinds of issues that come up related to service dogs.

The standards piece starts it. The standard we start with is publicly available. It's on our website. Anybody can see it.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

You've developed a standard to which you require partners to ascribe, and we're all here trying to solve this puzzle of why there is no national standard. You've developed one, and there's a bunch of providers that are keen to meet it.

Have you ever been given an explanation as to why the standard you've developed has not been used as at least a starting point or adopted in whole or in part by a provincial or federal government?

[Capt(N) (Ret'd) Philip Ralph]

That's a great question.

On what we developed, I have to give credit where credit is due. It's gained from sources that are out there. If you look at our standard and then at the Province of British Columbia's website, you're going to see a lot of similarities in the standards. As far as published standards go that are out there and available and actually in effect today, the Province of British Columbia actually has the best one in Canada. I can say that. I don't even live in the Province of British Columbia, so I'm not trying to do something with a hometown advantage.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

If it makes you feel any better, sir, you're not the first witness to have said that.

[Capt(N) (Ret'd) Philip Ralph]

I understand from veterans and first responders living in the Province of British Columbia that the downfall with the system seems to be that they're not readily enforcing the standard they have. How do you then regulate it?

There are all kinds of accessibility issues—the question was asked earlier—but once you have a standard, then you have what the dogs are and where they can access all those pieces that need to come in. They're important. It's an important starting place. I wouldn't say that we have the 100% solution, but it's certainly a great place to start.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Excellent. Thank you very much.

That brings us to the end of today's meeting. I want to, first and foremost, thank all the witnesses for their patience today. Also, thank you to all my colleagues for your indulgence to extend the meeting an extra half an hour, and a special thanks to the technical staff, through you, Mr. Clerk, if you could pass it along. When everything is running great, we love them. We grumble when everything is not running great, but without them, we wouldn't be heard at all today. Thank you to all the technical folks for getting us back on track today.

Thank you very much, everyone, and have a great weekend.

I adjourn today's meeting.