Veterans Affairs Committee on May 20th, 2022

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

Thank you. I really appreciate that.

Mr. Crabtree, you were talking about the actuarial assessments and that there hasn't been one for at least a decade. Is that normal?

I look at this and the amount of concern that has grown. You see it in the House of Commons, through these bills, these promises and then these changes. Why is there not a more up-to-date, constant reckoning of what this is actually going to cost the government if this were to happen or if that were to happen, to enable you to budget properly to make sure that the program can function?

[Simon Crabtree]

It's a good question. Ultimately we tend to do costings and enlist the services of the office of the chief actuary to support us in doing that kind of analysis only on an as-needed basis. It costs the plans money to perform these kinds of service, and there are a lot of different proposals that are put forward for changes to the plans, so unless something is being put forward for consideration by the government, we tend not to ask the office of the chief actuary to undertake this work.

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

It costs.

[Simon Crabtree]

It does come with a cost, and that cost is borne by the plan, so we try to minimize and find—

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

I hear you. That's fair enough. It's important that we understand these things and that veterans understand these things.

I have a question for Ms. Garrett-Baird.

You mentioned the different programs that are available for survivors to access. One of them you mentioned is the VIP, but again, here's the catch. It says it had to be used by the veteran.

I can tell you that it's one thing to be the veteran if you're the male in the family who may continue to do things like shovel and cut the grass, but if he is suddenly gone and the wife.... I can attest to the fact that I would struggle with those responsibilities, yet here it's attached again to whether or not the spouse needed it before passing away. This, to me, seems unreasonable. If we're truly concerned about meeting the needs of that veteran's spouse...and you're right, as Mr. Crabtree said, we're talking about people in their seventies, eighties and now occasionally nineties.

Mr. Chair, can she give a brief reply?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Yes, you have 15 seconds.

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

Thanks you so much, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Ms. Garrett-Baird, go ahead for 15 or 20 seconds.

[Crystal Garrett-Baird]

Sure, I'll be very quick.

There is the ability. There are low-income gateways as well through the veterans independence program for some primary caregivers for housekeeping and grounds maintenance. There are other opportunities there that we can work through to support those individuals.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you. That was quick.

I now invite Mr. Stéphane Lauzon to take the floor for the next five minutes.

Mr. Lauzon, we are listening.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to begin by thanking the witnesses for being here today, on this Friday afternoon.

Mr. Li piqued my curiosity when he talked about the difficulty of reaching people on the ground. Little has been said about how the pandemic has made things more difficult over the past two years.

How to reach seniors is a concern, given the connectivity issues in some rural areas, where the Internet is not available. In addition, seniors have difficulty using the Internet and various communication technologies.

What difficulties have you had in reaching seniors in rural or remote areas? What were the barriers related to technology?

[Dr. Eric Ping Hung Li]

We rely on the second generation. I briefly mentioned that, so if they can help us to set up.... Let's say video conferencing is good, but I did have some interviews done on forms. They don't have the Internet access but can join the call and then we set up our one-hour telephone conversations with them. We still can kind of reach out to those individuals.

A good number of those participants are living in remote regions, but having said that, COVID really limited our outreach. I would say, in the ideal or dream scenario, I would like to go to those places and interview them in their own houses and see their situations.

We work closely with the Legions, but their lunches or veterans gatherings were all cancelled during that time. Having said that, these would be some of the vehicles, as I mentioned, if not interrupted by COVID.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Let's talk about the Legion, because there are lots of Legions. They are far away from big centres. They're located in rural areas, and they don't even have Internet themselves. How was the collaboration with those organizations?

[Dr. Eric Ping Hung Li]

We tried with 200-plus Legions, but there were a lot who didn't respond to us. For those who responded to us, we only know they cancelled all their meetings during that time.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

It was difficult.

I have a question for Ms. Garrett‑Baird.

There has been a pension reform process in the past. Your many partners, including National Defence, Treasury Board and the Department of Justice, were part of that process. Was your department also involved in that process or in the decision-making? Was it consulted?

[Crystal Garrett-Baird]

Could I clarify whether you're referencing the veterans survivors fund or the superannuation acts?

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Let's start with the veterans survivors fund.

[Crystal Garrett-Baird]

With respect to the veterans survivors fund, when budget 2019 was announced we engaged with Statistics Canada, the Canadian Armed Forces and the Department of National Defence to determine what data was available. When we determined that the administrative data related only to the optional survivor benefit, we continued to work forward on how we could obtain the quantitative data needed for us to learn about the characteristics and size of this population. We worked with both of those organizations, along with the Canadian Institute for Military and Veteran Health Research, on the qualitative piece that Dr. Li spoke of.

Of course, Treasury Board Secretariat is aware of this fund as well, but they're working through it in terms of awareness. They're responsible for other superannuation acts.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you for your answer.

As I understand it, you all worked together.

In terms of the current form of the Veterans Survivor Fund, can you tell us what the benefits are?

Can you also tell us if, during the discussions, you mentioned low-income seniors and survivor income-sharing?

[Crystal Garrett-Baird]

Yes, we have. Through the work we undertook with Statistics Canada, we were able to determine the number of individuals in this population. As I mentioned, it's estimated to be 4,500. Most had higher incomes compared with other Canadian females in the same age group. Over 1,200 survivors, or 27%, were in receipt of the guaranteed income supplement. Approximately 850 of the 4,500 living survivors, or 19%, had incomes below the low-income measure.

I would note as well that we are of course engaged with other partners across government, one of them being ESDC. We are aware that there are changes to the old age security program coming into play on July 2022 for individuals 75 years and older.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Ms. Garrett‑Baird.

I now yield the floor to Mr. Luc Desilets.

Mr. Desilets, you have two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a few short questions for Mr. Crabtree.

Mr. Crabtree, we said this famous program would cost $1 billion. Can you tell us a little bit more about what that billion dollars would be used for?

[Simon Crabtree]

This $1 billion or $2 billion or whatever the final amount would be is an adjustment to the overall liability. This would be a one-time adjustment to the obligations of the pension plan to reflect these new expected benefits to be paid out over the course of current members' lifetimes and then in survivor benefits. This would not include members who have already retired and have predeceased. This would leave questions as to current members, I suppose, because this is on a go-forward basis.

That $2 billion, just to reiterate, is a go-forward for those who are currently members and paying into the plan and not those who have already retired or who have already predeceased their survivors.

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

Would this include the “marriage after 60” provision and what comes after retirement?

The $2 billion would be used for all of that, even to pay for liabilities. Is that right?

[Simon Crabtree]

That $2-billion figure notionally is the removal of the marriage after 60 clause from all three public sector pension plans.