Veterans Affairs Committee on May 6th, 2022

[Rechie Valdez, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Thank you.

Minister MacAulay, I'm going to do a selfish plug and ask that the next time you host that women's veterans event, you invite all of us from this committee to join you.

The next question I have is more about providing an update on the progress that's being done specifically for indigenous veterans accessing services. Have you made any changes or updates regarding outreach to indigenous veterans?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

We've invested, as you're probably aware, $30 million to recognize Second World War Métis veterans. We've developed a strategy on outreach to veterans and their families living in northern communities, including indigenous veterans living in the north. I do believe that we have a group from Veterans Affairs Canada with a regular schedule to go up north to make sure that they're dealing with veterans and that the department is on-site to deal with that.

Of course, increasingly we're partnering with organizations across the country, which has been so helpful, including with Indigenous Services Canada, to increase the awareness of our programs and services. Some of the problems that you see with veterans.... Even with regard to our education and training program, honestly it's hard to believe, but sometimes people are not aware of these programs and it's so important that they be aware of them. Number one, these programs help them get back into the workforce. Last night Rachel and I were at a meeting like that. These kinds of things are so important. We're also reaching out in indigenous languages.

In all of this, as the deputy indicated quite clearly, we're working to rearrange the table to make sure that we're adjusting to the requirements for Veterans Affairs Canada. We are and will continue to do that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Minister MacAulay.

Next is Mr. Luc Desilets.

Mr. Desilets, the floor is yours for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a brief question and I hope to get an equally brief answer.

In the budget planning, the funds appropriated for 2022‑2023 are $811 million less than the funds appropriated for 2021‑2022.

How do you explain this significant 12% drop?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much, colleague, for that question. I do get asked why fund money is returned. What has to take place, number one, is that we have enough funding in place to make sure we're able to pay for the remuneration of veterans who have received benefits.

Also, as you know, this meeting is on the estimates. In this regard, there's one example of $140 million that went for hiring more people, which in the end will mean there will be more applications approved, which means that the department will be putting out more money, which means that the estimates in the fall, in my guess, will be somewhat different.

I'm well aware, my honourable colleague, that you're very dedicated to this task and I can assure you that the dollars will be there to make sure that we provide the support for the veterans who truly deserve it. I appreciate your question on that.

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

Thank you.

In the present circumstances, I'm having a hard time understanding. This is money not spent over a year. There is a significant increase in funding for francophone human resources, among other things. Logically, we should at least be spending the same amount as the year before.

The table shows a significant drop of $800 million under the heading “Benefits, Services and Support”. In fact, that represents virtually all of the $811 million decline I referred to.

I don't have a lot of time left, Minister. The question was asked earlier. You know that Juno Beach is very important to me. Efforts have been made there. I have done other interviews here in Quebec on this subject.

I know everything that has been done to date.

Where are we on this? Are there possible solutions being considered? What are the new facts since last week?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Are you talking about the programs or Juno Beach?

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

I'm talking about the problem with the condominiums at Juno Beach.

Have there been new facts in the last week?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

There are less than 15 seconds left, Minister.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Could I get 15 seconds, Mr. Chair, please?

He's a tough chair, this fellow.

Anyhow, there's a mediation process in place. Luc, we can't be involved in that. It's all the groups that are there. The French government is fully involved. What we did there, we started a process, the only process that we could do, because it's French land, under French law and all of that. I'll keep you informed of any development, for sure, but what we did was a big help, and hopefully, it will be resolved properly.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the indulgence.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Minister MacAulay. You know I have to deal with that. I have no choice.

I would now like to invite MP Rachel Blaney for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, and I always appreciate how well our chair keeps us on time, so I thank him for that.

Minister, just so you understand the appropriate language around the pensions, it is called the optional survivor benefit, which is in correlation with the marriage after 60 clause. Specifically, what I'm trying to understand is.... We know that if they fill out this form, if they contribute that money—and in this one particular case, over $150,000 was contributed—if their loved one dies before they do, that nest egg they've put away for themselves is gone.

What I'm trying to clarify is, does that money go back to the government? Does that money just go back to general revenue? We know it is not going back to veterans, RCMP officers, or federal civil servants.

Could you let us know where that money goes, when it doesn't go to the people who should have it?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Rachel, my colleague, I thank you very much for your question.

The truth is, I will be in contact with you after this, and my office will be as well, in order to answer the question.

Is this money that the veteran has saved from their own pension? If it is, it belongs to either the person who invested it or the estate, but I don't think that's what you're asking me.

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

No, it is absolutely what I am asking you. I appreciate your saying that. I do believe it belongs to the person or the estate, so thank you for saying that—

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Well, I don't know.

No, no—

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

—and I thank you for looking into that.

Minister, if you could also let me know, the director general of the RCMP compensation services has told my office that the pensioner must take a medical examination to determine whether he or she is suffering from terminal illness, and must live for a minimum of 12 months from the time the monthly contributions commence for the optional survivor benefit.

Can we just confirm from VAC whether this policy is in place for veterans who want to take part in the OSB program?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

I will make sure that you receive an appropriate response, Rachel, but we have to find out what's exactly taking place, where the money came from directly, where it's invested and what takes place afterward.

That will happen, I assure you, but we have to get a full understanding of what—

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

Thank you so much, Minister. I look forward to seeing that.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much. The chair will be after us anyhow.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Ms. Blaney.

Minister, we are going to have two other interventions. This means we are going until 2:05 instead of 2 p.m.

For five minutes, we will have Mrs. Cathay Wagantall and Mr. Fraser Tolmie.

Please go ahead, Mrs. Wagantall.

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

Thank you, Chair.

It's so good to see you again, Minister, and you, Mr. Ledwell. I appreciate your being here.

I hear from you that we have a problem in regard to national standards for service dogs. That problem developed...it imploded, actually, that committee, because of a conflict of interest that existed extensively across the board with not enough arm's length from those who were engaged in making those standards take place. I'm actually glad it's defunct. We do need another one. That's certainly something we're working on here as a committee. We're looking forward to presenting recommendations to VAC on that.

In the meantime, you did give funding to Wounded Warriors Canada. I did call them and talk to them, because they were part of that committee. They have a vested interest themselves as an organization in providing service dogs and training them. I saw that as a little bit disconcerting because of the dysfunctional state of that team.

I would like to ask you this. In that funding that was provided to them, they did use it to develop their own program and also did provide some funding to other organizations, but not to all. Again, I see that we really need to come up with standards that are fair across this nation for all of the providers.

Sir, I would just like to ask you if you can guarantee—not knowing what will work best, and hopefully looking at our recommendations—a standards board that is arm's length to take information from our veterans and these organizations. We need that decision-making to happen outside of the veterans service dog funding community. Can you assure me that the standards board will be arm's length from VAC and from the providers of service dogs?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

I think the chair is going to let me take the floor.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Yes. Go ahead, please.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Cardigan, PE]

Thank you very much.

Were you concerned about the Wounded Warriors and the funding they received? I just want to clarify that.

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

I understand that you gave them funding in the midst of the whole process of that particular standards committee falling apart. That's what I was told. They received funding. But he also did say that they're very excited about developing a program themselves, which at that point puts them in a situation where they don't have arm's length either. They have a vested interest in the programming and in the providing of service dogs. The standard board has to be separate from the individuals and organizations that have a vested interest themselves.