Veterans Affairs Committee on Oct. 20th, 2022

[Paul Ledwell]

Thanks very much, Member.

I think the first reaction was one of surprise, even shock, that this kind of a conversation would take place. The relationship we and the people in our department have with veterans is one that is built on trust, one that is built on service and one that is built on ensuring that the veteran is getting what they need. This case clearly indicated, at least when it came to light, that it was a conversation that went beyond where the employee should have gone. Most significantly, it created a great deal of trouble and negative reaction, understandably—a challenging reaction by the veteran.

I think the first thing is to make sure the veteran is doing all right and that we are doing whatever we can to reach out to that veteran to ensure that it is identified as an occurrence that should not have happened, and that if they are going through any trauma as a result of the conversation, we're there to support them and respond to that.

My first reaction was one of surprise. My second reaction was to ask how we are supporting and addressing the needs of this particular veteran who has gone through this circumstance. My third reaction was to ask how we correct this and make sure it doesn't occur again.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Thank you, Deputy. I really appreciate the fact that you shared with the committee not only the discussion around the file of the employee and all other employees—the verification—but also the fact that you brought to the table the continuous review and discussions with the veterans to make sure that the veteran is in good health and their needs and benefits are being reviewed and discussed. I think it's important that we continue that relationship on that front.

Now, I know the minister apologized publicly and the department apologized publicly, but I have to assume that the managerial person who made the call to verify what took place with the veteran probably also apologized directly. Would we be able to confirm that?

[Paul Ledwell]

I think the individual in the circumstances in which this transpired realized while it was transpiring or through the transpiring of this that it had gone to a point that was unacceptable. That doesn't excuse the action, but I think that the individual, the employee, certainly recognized that. We still have to deal with the effects and the impact of it, and that's what we're doing very seriously.

Has that individual apologized directly to the veteran? I can't say that. I don't believe that's the case, because the conversation came to a close. I can't say that for certain.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Thank you. It's important for the committee to note that it's not part of VAC's services to speak or advise on medical assistance in dying. I do know that once MAID was passed, some training and information were sent down, and now, of course, there's much more.

Just for the committee's understanding, if someone, a veteran, brings it up, what type of conversation would we expect to hear?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Excuse me. Maybe you could give us a 10-second answer, please. If not, we have to go.

[Paul Ledwell]

Very quickly, Member, the veteran would be referred to their health care professional—to their physician or their nurse practitioner—who would be the only one in a position to provide that kind of guidance.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Samson.

Now I'd like to go back to Mr. Blake Richards for five minutes.

Go ahead, please.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Thanks.

I want to pick up from where we were cut off before.

It sounds as though, in the course of the investigation of what occurred, the caseworker in question in the incident that initiated the investigation has now been determined to have.... There have been two times when there have been conversations about medical assistance in dying. As you said, one was prompted and one was not. In one case, we may have a veteran who has taken their life as a result.

Obviously, there's more concern now than there was before. Now we're talking about two instances at least. It's isolated to one caseworker—it's what you believe—but it may be at least two instances. We don't know how many instances. Are there other veterans who are now dead as a result?

What I need to ask is where the investigation is going. Is the investigation now going back through all of the files of this caseworker to determine whether there have been other instances besides these two in which there has been counselling—inappropriately—about medical assistance in dying? How many veterans are now dead as a result?

[Paul Ledwell]

I can assure you, Member, that this is part of this review. It's to do a complete and thorough review of the files of this veterans service agent to see and ascertain where this issue may have been raised.

What we have been able to identify thus far is that there is the case that is before us, a very troubling case. It was raised unprompted between that veterans service agent and the veteran. There's one other case with this veterans service agent in engagement with a veteran in which it was the veteran who raised this as a consideration.

We don't know—and I can't tell you right now—what transpired in that case. This was a situation in which it was the veteran who raised the issue, with a view to asking, as I understand it, what kind of implication that would have on the benefits for that veteran and/or their family.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Okay. I think I understand that, but what I need to hear from you is whether the investigation is now going back through all of the files of this particular caseworker to determine whether there have been other instances besides these two, and whether veterans are now dead as a result.

[Paul Ledwell]

Yes, to the first question, absolutely.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

What about that second question, then? Will the investigation determine whether there are veterans who are now deceased as a result?

[Paul Ledwell]

I think that the implication of the first question, and the answer to it, is yes to the second question—

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Okay, but I wanted to be sure. I'm glad to hear that.

I came into this meeting quite concerned about this situation. I think everyone around this table is, without exception, and I'm sure all Canadians are quite concerned about what happened, but I will say that now, leaving this meeting, I'm more concerned.

I'm glad to hear that there's an investigation happening. I'm glad that all of those files are being looked at. Are we talking about the active files of this individual, or will the files all the way back be looked at?

[Paul Ledwell]

My understanding is that it's all of the files related to this employee.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Okay. That's also good news.

I would assume that the information will then become part of the report, which you have now indicated you will share. The minister has indicated that it will be shared with this committee.

[Paul Ledwell]

That's correct.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

That's good.

There are a couple of other things, and I have one minute, so I'm probably going to touch on one of the other things. It was raised earlier a couple of times. It's about the minister apologizing directly to the veteran involved in the case that led to this meeting.

I'm well aware of the privacy issues that exist, etc. Would it not be the case that if the minister wanted to apologize directly to this individual, it could be asked of whoever at Veterans Affairs is now in contact with that particular veteran to just indicate that the minister would like to personally apologize to the veteran and to ask the veteran if they would be willing to accept that phone call? Could that not be done?

[Paul Ledwell]

I think that absolutely it could be done. The question could be posed to the veteran, and if they're open and willing to receive that.... I think that in this case, for everyone and most especially for the veteran, we want to ensure that all of the review and investigation is complete before that's done.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I would just suggest to you—because the minister's no longer here, obviously—that you make that suggestion. He did indicate he would like to have that opportunity if it were available to him. I would just ask that you make that suggestion to him. Maybe we could see that move forward so that he could....

I think it would mean a lot to the veteran to have the Minister of Veterans Affairs make that apology. I think it's the right thing to do. I hope you'll make that suggestion.

[Paul Ledwell]

Absolutely. I think that contained in that understanding is the seriousness with which this issue has to be reviewed and reported on, as the minister identified.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

That is all the time we have.

Thank you.

I should also remind you that this is the last round of questions and answers we will do, given the amount of time we have.

I now invite Churence Rogers to take the floor for the next five minutes.

[Churence Rogers, Liberal, Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL]

Mr. Chair, I don't know if I need five minutes, but I do have one particular question I'd like to put to Mr. Ledwell.

Can you clarify for the committee what the actual role of a VAC employee is when it comes to a veteran's request? When they request medical assistance in dying, what's the actual role of the employee at Veterans Affairs?

[Paul Ledwell]

The first role of the employee is to make it very clear that it's a consideration the veteran should be engaging in with their health professionals and their medical professionals. That's an issue we cannot engage with them on in terms of the determination or the consideration the veteran may be going through with respect to MAID.

Where we do have a function and a responsibility is in responding to the issues that the veteran may have with respect to the implications of anything they may undertake on their benefits and the supports they are receiving and the supports their family members will continue to receive, and considerations around those things. We have all of the understanding and the technical expertise to provide that advice to the veteran. We cannot engage on the consideration of medically assisted dying. That's very clear in our policy and very clear in our guidelines, and that has now been considerably reinforced through this isolated incident.

[Churence Rogers, Liberal, Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL]

I guess, then, that it's safe to assume that once you have a veteran requesting medical assistance in dying, that sets off alarm bells, and the department engages all the medical professionals who need to be engaged to deal with the veteran.