Evidence of meeting #110 for Veterans Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was sean.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good morning to all my colleagues.
I thank the witnesses for their service to the country. Their testimony is very moving.
Ms. Richard, how many years have you been fighting for this cause? You alluded to it indirectly a little earlier.
Lt (N) Louise Richard
I started when I was in my hospital room, back when I was still in uniform. That was in 1993, I believe.
Bloc
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
In your opinion, have things progressed at all since 1993?
Lt (N) Louise Richard
From what I've observed over the years I've been involved in this cause, things have changed, but not for the better.
It's not the treatment, the help or the support provided that have changed; it's the fact that we have more laws, more policies, more procedures, more expectations. We now have less information.
Everyone just sends us to a website now. I don't know if you've been to the Veterans Affairs Canada website. It's appalling.
Lt (N) Louise Richard
I'm a nurse. I have health issues. The Gulf War caused a lot of sickness, not just death on the front lines, on the battlefield. It also caused invisible diseases, the symptoms of which have evolved and now correspond to diseases that are better known today. In my day, people used to talk about symptoms. When the symptoms became chronic, an illness could then be diagnosed.
I didn't get the information that enabled me to understand what I was going through from Canada. I got it from the United States.
I believe Canada sent about 6,000 troops to the Gulf War. The United States sent 700,000, so I understand why the information is more available there. Nevertheless, my country is Canada, and it is Canada's responsibility to inform me and help me understand what's going on. There's no point in telling me that everything is in my head, that nobody knows what I'm suffering from and that I should pop some pills and go away.
I had to do the research myself. I had to find the information and put all the pieces together myself. Once I started connecting the dots and figuring out what caused my illness, I couldn't keep quiet. There were too many other people my age around me, young people. I'm not talking about officers like I was myself. I'm talking about people who aren't necessarily informed, who rely on us, on officers, to guide them and help them. However, when we ourselves are suffering and we don't have information or the support of our superiors, who may be the first to judge us, where does that leave us?
Bloc
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
You were in the Gulf War. People have told this committee that, while Canada obviously participated in a war, Canada wasn't at war.
What are your thoughts on that?
Bloc
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
We can laugh at that, but it's not funny.
Mr. Bruyea, looking at the committee minutes of March 19, 2013, if I'm not mistaken, I see that our very dear Mr. Casey, of whom I'm very fond, said during Louise Richard's testimony that the Liberal Party put forward a minority report recommending that the burden of proof be lowered for veterans. He said that he had listened and that he was going to take action.
I should remind you that the Conservatives were in power at the time under former prime minister Stephen Harper.
Eleven years have passed since then. In your opinion, have things changed?
Retired Captain, Air Force Intelligence Officer, As an Individual
Two days ago, my wife came in and I was downstairs in the work room where I store my files, and I couldn't stop crying, because I wanted to be true to you when I came back here to make sure I truly understood what was written in my medical reports. And the conditions were there. They're real. Then, as I was crying on the phone to Louise, she asked me about these presumptive conditions that I was mentioning. I looked them up. As we know, Australia and the United States both have these presumptive conditions, and this is what I believe Mr. Casey was talking about when he talked in 2013. A presumptive condition is to get a diagnosis—maybe the intensity of that diagnosis—so they can assess your disability level. That's all you need to get a disability pension, because that diagnosis is recognized as consequential to your service.
I have here a list of Gulf War presumptive conditions that have been in place for years. And we still can't get there.
On the first four—chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, functional gastrointestinal disorders and medically unexplained multi-pain symptoms—I had them all, but I had to prove them. I had to prove them first to CPP in an 80-page testimony. Then I had to prove them to SISIP in another 80-page submission. Then I had to prove them to Veterans Affairs. Then I had to prove them again to Veterans Affairs in their departmental review, then I had to provide them evidence for that review, then I had to do another departmental review. A presumptive condition would have ignored all of that. In 1990, $30,000 was a lot of money, but it's not the big problem. It's the suffering that comes with my having to prove that case like a lawyer and a police investigator, beyond any doubt. I mean, I've never experienced this benefit of the doubt that exists in Veterans Affairs, apparently. I can tell you that my having to prove that case was grossly debilitating and set me back years. I could have been working. I could have been putting those efforts into retraining.
Bloc
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Bruyea, over the past few weeks, you've sent us a lot of very relevant documents, including a list of recommendations.
Could you briefly speak to recommendation 5, which is about reversing the onus of proof?
If I understand correctly, it's not a problem for someone who has lost a leg, but it can be more complicated in other cases.
Retired Captain, Air Force Intelligence Officer, As an Individual
That's a good question.
I'm compulsive with the documents. I'm sorry about that.
I hope they're helpful. I really do. I think they're very important. I am so grateful that you guys are doing this study, because, as you've come to realize, this has opened up a box and a door and a lid that's been closed for far too long and that we have to address. It addresses 600,000 transitioned veterans over the last 75 to 80 years.
Those veterans, first of all, should have all been covered 24 hours a day when in Canada under the insurance principle. We did it for World War II veterans domiciled in Canada when they were in active service, and we should have been doing it, because what we do in the military every day is train for a special duty service.
The fact that the arbitrary date of September 11, 2001, was used to say, “When you're on training, then we're going to cover you 24 hours a day....” We're on training all the time. Why wasn't that made retroactive back to 1950? It's inexcusable in my mind.
First of all, what would help solve the problem is putting everyone under the insurance principle, but I think the reverse onus is very important. It would be up to Veterans Affairs to prove that what we're claiming is not true. They would have to provide evidence. They would have to do the work, and I wouldn't have to produce so many documents.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
For the next six minutes, I would like to invite Ms. Rachel Blaney to take the floor.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
Thank you, Chair.
I want to thank you both so much for being here today and for sharing this reality that you're living.
I have to say that both of you have quite the stack of paperwork in front of you. I appreciate that hard work, but I also feel a great deal of sadness that that's been given to you as part of your service without any pre-emptive discussion with you that, when you were done your service, you would have to work so hard just to prove it. It makes me think of a lot of veterans my office has worked with who may not have that skill set and, when they don't have that skill set, how utterly silenced they are and how frustrated they are and how painful that is.
The longer I'm on this committee—and I've been on this committee for many years—the more that component of humanity is part of the system that I think is broken. Not that there aren't great people who work at Veterans Affairs—I think both of you have talked about that—but there's something in the system that is really broken and forgets humanity. That's how I'll start.
Sean, you and I have talked a lot, and I want to thank you for the duty to inform. Earlier this month, I put forward a motion in the House of Commons so that we could really start pushing that issue and ask the House to acknowledge that there should be a legislative duty for the government to meaningfully inform and assist serving members of the Canadian Armed Forces, as well as released members and their families, in understanding the various benefits and services to which they may be entitled, no matter how extreme their disabilities or their loss. I think that lack of support is part of the problem.
I've also heard, as has the committee, from service providers who feel they have to go and educate the Veterans Affairs staff about what services they provide so that they actually get the correct referrals. People are finding them, but until VAC refers them to that service, they can't access that service.
I'm going to start with you, Sean. Could you share a little with us about why the duty to inform is so important? One of the things that would be very helpful for me in your answer is to hear some of the ways that could be done. You talked about people showing up back in the day and hanging up their coats and sticking around to help. I know we have a different world right now. I know of veterans for whom it sometimes takes two months to open mail from Veterans Affairs, because they have challenges. At least that's in their house, so somebody can hopefully open it for them, but we have to figure out.... With all of the distrust that's been built, unfortunately—maybe not intentionally, but the impact is there—when we talk about the duty to inform, what could that look like?
Retired Captain, Air Force Intelligence Officer, As an Individual
I want every member of the committee to hear that I reached out to Rachel. I'm an office of one. I would love to have the energy, time and health to reach out to every one of you about the duty to inform. I want to appeal to you all to hear what Rachel is saying, because this is a very non-partisan issue.
Before I get to the answer about how to do it, if we look at the scale of obligation and imagine the scale of military service in terms of obligation, we would have a scale ranging from, “Hey, I really want you to do this; it would be nice if you could do this” to, “By the way, there's a bylaw against that” to, “Oh, that's a civil charge” to, “That's a criminal charge”, and we would go on that scale all the way to here. Military service is way past the criminal charge. If we don't do something right, the crimes are much more serious and the punishment is much more serious than if we're a civilian.
That's our obligation to the military. Everything we must do—enter harm's way, lose our life—we cannot question.
What's the obligation of government to veterans? It doesn't even reach, “It would be really nice if you helped me out with my benefit application”. The reciprocal obligation is non-existent. All I'm asking for is just an obligation by government to start that step of showing they really recognize the sacrifices we make, the exigencies of service, the pain, the education levels and the psychological circumstances. They have an obligation to make sure that we get to know about the benefits to which we're entitled.
I'm sure you understand. You have all been here questioning what the department says when they're trying to explain benefits. It's mind-boggling. You guys are mostly healthy, I assume, and you're working full time. You're highly educated, and you see policy every day, and it's complex for you. What about the mostly grade-10-level-educated veterans who got out in the 1990s? What about them? They're not going to understand this policy. They're not going to understand a newsletter that comes from Veterans Affairs and says, “You may be entitled to this benefit, contact us”. Then we call up, and we get a 1-800 number, and the referral doesn't transfer to a veteran service agent. It's a generic worker on the line who reads us out a sheet that still doesn't explain anything in great detail.
I needed help to fill out those applications, and I was still able to do what I did. There are people out there who can't even put pen to paper. They need someone to fill it out for them.
It would look like, first of all, building trust, and not the rhetoric of “We really care about your sacrifice” from Veterans Affairs, and “We're really well-meaning, and we work so hard for you”. They're overwhelmed. Let's give them staff to go out and personally brief, help and advocate. As the DND ombudsman once said in his report, everyone should be provided with a coach upon release.
I would say that, for all those veterans who also exist, those coaches should be available. We still need coaching every day—maybe not some weeks, but there are periods when we do—and we need to get coaches out there who help them. They could be occupational therapists or they could be case managers, but these have to be qualified people who know the programs and know how to deal with a person with a disability. We should meet them on their grounds, not on Veterans Affairs' grounds, because those district officers are scary with the bulletproof glass. They're very impersonal, so let's meet where people feel safe. Just like in the military, they can only listen if they feel safe.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
Thank you for that answer.
Of course, I want to make sure that my motion is on the record. For anybody in this place who might want to look at it, it is Motion No. 132. I hope that's right.
I really appreciate what you said about the reality, that it often feels very impersonal. Another concern—and this is a little sidetrack for me—is that we have multiple veterans who we work with—and I'm sure my colleagues do as well—who are extremely traumatized and have had very bad experiences with VAC, and we intercede. We are always working with them. One of the things I find very concerning is the lack of awareness of how to provide trauma-informed care. Of course, the most difficult people you're dealing with at any office are the ones with the greatest amount of trauma, and, in this particular sector, that would be a larger number.
I wonder if both of you could talk about what you think trauma-informed care and training from the Veterans Affairs would really add in terms of delivering services to veterans.
Lt (N) Louise Richard
Thank you. It's a very pertinent subject.
There's a saying amongst veterans that if you don't have PTSD while you're serving, Veterans Affairs will cause it, because it's very traumatizing. It's very intimidating.
Soldiers are proud. We follow what we're to do. We follow mission. We don't complain. We just march on, so when we are the ones reaching out for help, that's hard for us.
One thing that I've realized in dealing with Veterans Affairs personally is, number one, there's no continuity. There's no continuity on the phone, at a district office or an office. It's never the same person. You need to repeat your story every single time. You're hoping that the person you spoke to prior to this one now took notes and took them correctly.
I agree with Sean that we don't have enough local support. It was sad when the Conservatives closed all those offices. We're grateful for them reopening, but it's not enough.
I know Mr. Sean Casey is offended about Charlottetown, and I understand it's your area, but there are major issues when it comes to Charlottetown.
I was privileged to serve on the SNAG, the special needs advisory group that was created in 2005, prior to the new veterans charter coming in on April Fool's Day in 2006. We were very privileged to have spent time in Charlottetown and we went through the headquarters in Charlottetown. I was appalled at what I saw. Walking in there, the attitude of people, first of all, was.... They never see veterans, they never speak to veterans and they don't understand the needs. It's all just paper, files, policy, legislation, more legislation, changes and amendments.
In certain areas of the headquarters, it's like walking into a grocery store. It's aisle after aisle of files. It's not structured in a manner of, “This gentleman just lost a leg. He is critical and needs care and help yesterday.” They don't have a system of prioritizing the care and the needs. If he applies for a job and his file arrived yesterday, he might wait eight months until they get to this file. A more minor situation—a leg injury, a knee problem or something—that's straightforward and cut and dried will be addressed quickly. It seems that the more complex the files, the longer the delay.
The other thing that I noticed in Charlottetown was that people did not have that sense of urgency. It was just a file. I got upset at a few of them. I said, “Do you realize these are people?”
These people have families and children. They're hurting and they need care. They need help. They need money. They need benefits. They need care, but the way the system is organized, you don't receive care until they have decided that actually, yes, you do have this disability, so they'll give you whatever. Then you're entitled to getting care.
That's fine, but they are very detached from the reality of the world of a veteran and of the needs. It is more policy and procedure versus anything else.
The other thing that I was just shocked about was.... My mother came with me to Charlottetown on this one trip. She was staying at the hotel one afternoon, and she was in the hot tub having a cocktail. Great. These three gentlemen came into the hot tub and joined her. She started chatting and asked them if they were there on a trip or just for fun. They replied that they worked for Veterans Affairs.
Here they were sitting in the hot tub enjoying a cocktail while we were in the headquarters looking at all these pending files, pending needs and pending decisions. These are lives on the line here where people are depressed or suicidal. They've lost their identity, their career and their income. Many don't know what's going on. They don't have the medical knowledge. They're stuck in a paper warfare nightmare that they don't understand. Very few are there to help guide.
There again, it takes courage to even reach out to ask for help. Where would you go? Who would you turn to?
What I witnessed, not only in 2005 with SNAG, but with the new veterans charter—or as it's called now, the Veterans Well-being Act—a decision was made finally shortly after that an ombudsman's office would be created.
Thank you, Sean, for spearheading that. It's thanks to Sean that this gained momentum and came to fruition.
I was privileged to have been selected to be a sitting member with Pat Stogran on the ombudsman's committee. We were back again in Charlottetown this time. I didn't see any change at all.
Now, since COVID, what I've been approached about and what veterans are reaching out to me about is that, sadly, with COVID, a lot of people work from home. What happens to all these files? What happens then?
I, myself, have problems going on the Internet to deal with My VAC Account. I struggle with that.
There's also the trust factor of it. That was the other thing in Charlottetown: Where's the confidentiality?
We're forced to find doctors because Veterans Affairs does not have any VA hospital. We have nowhere to go, so we have to depend on civilian doctors who are, God forbid, hopefully willing to take us. As soon as they hear you're a Veterans Affairs client, they don't want to deal with you. There are the assessments, the paperwork, the denials, the appeals and, oh gosh, the Veterans Review and Appeal Board. It is endless.
Every time you go through these levels of administrative nightmares, you need more fresh documentation to justify what they've denied. Who's going to pay for that?
Because the veteran chooses to appeal the decision, it's up to that person now to find a new doctor and fresh documentation that they have to pay for. Doctors do not write reports freely. Some specialist reports can cost up to $5,000. I've had to borrow money for my own fight with Veterans Affairs.
Here we are begging for help where policy, procedure and legislation all overrule the needs of the veteran. The veteran is left on their own to fight this. I apologize, but to me, Charlottetown can no longer be there. Veterans Affairs headquarters can no longer hide its head in sand and get away with too much, not being accountable and just no sense of urgency. It has to stop. Almost half of the Veterans Affairs staff across our nation are in Charlottetown.
We need areas speckled across our nation where we can go in physically, speak to someone, create a bond, a trust, have a sense of continuity, a sense of understanding. It doesn't do it to call 1-866-522-2122 and speak to whomever yet again, repeat your story again, hope to be heard again. How are they interpreting all this legislation and all these policies? They don't understand it themselves.
When I was with the special needs advisory group, we were thrown into these huge workshops, along with Veterans Affairs staff, with binders and binders of this is how the policy is, this is how it's to be applied. Well, if he misses one finger, this is there. If he's missing three, well, that's where that goes. We need to stop looking at a veteran's needs as a sliver of a pie. We are mind, body, soul. We are one.
For the young man who got his leg blown off, are we just going to look at him as missing a limb? Don't you think he's traumatized by that? What about his colleagues who witnessed this horror? What about the soldier who's firing this weapon all day long? What about the traumatic brain injuries happening here?
We were in the most toxic battlefield in modern history—the Gulf War. Many are dead now. They've died with weird cancers, tumours and lesions, and Veterans Affairs does not have an active research department. What is Veterans Affairs judging me upon to deny me a condition that the United States sure the heck recognizes? So many things have to change here, and the first thing is Charlottetown.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Lieutenant Richards, thank you very much. It's been an hour now.
I think you would agree with me to take a pause for five minutes and come back. I think it's going to help our interpreters also.
The meeting is suspended.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Ladies and gentlemen, I call this meeting back to order.
For five minutes I would like to invite Mrs. Cathay Wagantall to have the floor.
Conservative
Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK
Thank you so much, Chair.
To both Sean and Louise, thank you so much for your testimony today.
I've been a member of Parliament since 2015 and had the opportunity to serve alongside John Brassard, whom I know you know, as shadow deputy minister at the time. It's been almost 10 years that I've sat on this committee. I think I'm even more of a matron of the committee than Rachel is. Yes.
I have to say, everything I'm hearing today, all of the concerns about being unaware of what was available to you, the sanctuary trauma—which if you don't get it in the field, in theatre, you get it when you come home—the challenges for families, every issue that you have mentioned today I have heard over this last decade. A lot of it is attributable to the work that you have done, but I can also say that this committee has done report after report with recommendations that come from folks like you, and yet there doesn't seem to be any change.
Of course, the reports from here go to the government. The government gives its feedback and then we wait.
When I was on the committee the first time, it took us until into 2017 to get everything and the government, working again. However, there had been a report that had been done on transition in 2014, before Stephen Harper's government was defeated, which everyone agreed to.
The first thing we decided to study here was transition. Being a newbie, at the time I just said, “But that was just done and there were recommendations, so why aren't we looking at whether they're implementing them, and how far it's gone, and this type of thing?" The response was, "No, we need to study it again". So, clearly, the machine is broken.
I just want to mention one more thing, and then I will pass it to you. I don't want to take up all my own time; I get upset when people do that.
I want to mention that in October 2017, John Brassard introduced Bill C-378 , an act to amend the Department of Veterans Affairs Act, in an attempt to entrench principles of respect, dignity and fairness in an armed forces covenant. At that time, he said that we owe a duty of care to our veterans. Every veteran and their families must have timely access to the care and benefits that they need and deserve. That has been in front of the House again, and it was defeated when the Liberal government voted against it at second reading.
My question is, can you explain this to me further? This, to me, is the crux of the matter.
Also, on the role of the ombudsman, which you had a role in setting up, are they independent enough, from your perspective? That's also a question I would like an answer to.
Retired Captain, Air Force Intelligence Officer, As an Individual
I don't want to be partisan here, but as Louise and I were answering about moving Veterans Affairs from Charlottetown, the member, Sean Casey, gave us a very reproving look, and I think it has to be called out because that sort of look is just the beginning of the stigmatization that prevented us from getting care. It's the sort of look that says, “You have no right to step on my territory.” “There is no Gulf War syndrome,” Colonel Ken Scott would say, but he set up a clinic that would refer patients, which I was referred to, and I was told, “We don't believe in Gulf War syndrome, but we set up a clinic for Gulf War syndrome. Then, when you get there, we'll tell you there's no Gulf War syndrome.” Why do you think I didn't go to the clinic? It was so absurd. I want to say that I respect Sean Casey and I've worked with him in the past, but he has perverse incentives too.
What we really have to do, from a non-partisan basis, is look at priorities. The priority is that.... Everyone, every Canadian we ask to put on that uniform exercises their right and choice to join the military, but once you're in the military the powers of influence are so strong that we're willing to do stuff that sane people don't do: That's the definition of indoctrination. Yes, the immediate affront taken from our suggestion that we should move Charlottetown...there are compromises. You're all politicians here—there's a compromise. Move Charlottetown's Veterans Affairs headquarters out, with the decision-makers out, and put in equivalent job replacements from call centres that big cities or centres don't need.
We also know, in Charlottetown, that there's competition for skilled medical staff. Skilled medical staff are being poached by the provincial agencies, and anyone will tell you—it's the worst-guarded secret in the world—that Veterans Affairs is struggling to staff because of this cross-poaching that occurs. Moving Veterans Affairs out of Charlottetown would be a solution—where the decision-makers are there—and replace it with some other federal program that allows the same employment in the same area, and then Sean Casey doesn't have to give us that look anymore.
In terms of answering your question of where the big problem is, it's there: It's politics. It's money. All sacrifices that occur—they're sitting at this table, and that you guys have listened to for years—are occurring to preserve this system. It's now the turn of government and of Canadians to sacrifice on behalf of veterans. We upheld our end of the bargain. We have to have some sacrifices.
In the military—you've heard this often, again—when we join and are ordered to do something, we can't say no. Why is it that the public service can keep saying no to you? I don't understand that. I don't understand why more force isn't put. I don't understand why Parliament would not unanimously endorse a duty to care or a duty to inform. It's beyond me, and I don't know why, under these circumstances and with that lack of reciprocity, people would join the military.