Veterans Affairs Committee on Oct. 19th, 2023

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

—and we will make those arrangements. Please, I will make sure that my staff reaches out to him and to you before I leave today. and we'll make some arrangements.

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

Thank you so much. I really appreciate that.

You know, for me, I'm always going to ask questions about marriage after 60, because I have committed to many veterans and their spouses that this is a fight that I will continue fighting as long as I possibly can, hoping for a resolution sooner rather than later.

Mr. Chair, there was great participation at my event for women veterans. The minister was there and had a chance to meet with Madeline Landry, a person I have a great amount of respect for. Of course, I know that Madeline shared her story. The reality is that she was married for over 20 years to her veteran spouse and she now does not receive any survivor pension benefits.

We know that the annual pension payout from the federal government is $12 billion. According to the PBO report, eliminating the gold digger clause would add an increase of less than 2% to the annual payout. I'm confused as to why this isn't addressed. I get a lot of largely women calling my office who are quite elderly and who tell me that they are not gold diggers. I believe that they are not gold diggers.

In 2019, $150 million was put aside for the survivor's benefit. We're now in 2023. This is a crisis.

Minister, when you will eliminate this clause?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you so much, Ms. Blaney, for that question, and thank you again for hosting the event this week. It was important.

Don't forget that I'm a member of Parliament as well, and I meet with many constituents in my riding. I have also met with a few individuals in my office who are dealing with this situation.

The name of that clause I refuse even to say, because it's just not appropriate. That said, we certainly recognize that family members and spouses serve with their partners. We certainly recognize that many of them are left in vulnerable situations. We are committed to making sure that we provide them with some support. That's why in budget 2019 we announced the veterans survivors fund. Now, being week nine or 10 into the job, I'm absolutely still getting briefed up, but that area is a top priority of mine. We certainly want to look at ways in which we can better support our seniors now.

Another issue is how to identify these individuals as well. We have to keep in mind that many individuals aren't part of the Veterans Affairs system, if you will. They're not part of our accounts. That makes it a bit of a challenge to be able to find these individuals, but we have to be up to the challenge of being able to roll out some type of program that can help these individuals in their time of need.

I'm committed to making sure that we get that work done.

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

Thank you. I'm sure a lot of these folks can self-identify and give you proper documentation. I hope that's done quickly. We need to get that money out the door for largely women who are struggling with immense poverty after years and years, in some cases, of caring for veterans.

I hear a lot from veterans about how bureaucratic the process is. There's frustration that they can't get things done. One thing that comes up a lot is that of course they have to submit, for a lot of their claims, medical documentation within 30 days. We all know in this country that a lot people don't have family doctors. Trying to fit into that timeline can be very, very challenging.

We also know that the Veterans Review and Appeal Board has approved at 98% the claims for tinnitus and hearing loss. I'm just wondering, when are we going to get that automatic approval for this? This would really help with the amount of work that is being done in the department, and it would honour these folks. It seems a shame that they apply for it and then they have to go to the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, where the rate is 98%. I think if we have an extra 2% who shouldn't have it, it's better than a lot of people not having the supports that they desperately need.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you for that question.

I certainly hear that when it comes to hearing loss and tinnitus, we have a large number of claims coming forward. I also hear that a large number of claims, if they're not approved at first glance from the adjudicator and they go to the review board, are approved. I think we certainly have to make sure, however, that the proper documentation is in place to make sure that we can determine if it's service-related. At least some criteria, I think, have to be established.

Again, I was speaking to my deputy minister just this week, indicating there that have to be ways to find more efficiencies within our service in order to make sure that, again, we can take that load from our caseworkers to allow them to do more of the casework. That's an ongoing conversation.

Like you, Ms. Blaney, I truly do believe there are efficiencies that we would be able to find with respect to that type of medical condition.

I don't know if Steven wants to add anything.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Sorry. The time is running out. We will have another tour, so you will be able to come back on that.

We will now begin the second round of questions, in which the speaking time will be allocated differently.

I'd like to invite Mr. Richards for five minutes, please.

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

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Minister, I want to come back to the trust issue, but first I want to touch on one other thing.

Do you believe that the Persian Gulf War was, in fact, just that, a war?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I certainly recognize that it was a mission that our members took part in.

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

Do you consider it a war?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Again, I am not the person, Mr. Richards, to define if it's a war or not. I think we recognize that the department, DND, is the one that makes the definition between war and special operations.

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

What's your personal opinion? Would you call it a war?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I think that all members who are serving in the Canadian Armed Forces are sacrificing a lot for freedoms around the world, and I think that all of that service must be recognized and commemorated and honoured. We should thank them and honour them for all the work they've done.

Again, I want to add that I have several members who are serving in the Canadian Armed Forces. I take their service very seriously.

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

We sure appreciate that, but I think there are many members who served in our armed forces who served in that war—I will call it that, a war—who feel they aren't properly recognized because it's not considered wartime service.

It even says in VAC's own publications that it was the Persian Gulf War, yet they're not recognized as having served in wartime. That leaves many of our veterans feeling like they aren't considered the way they deserve to be. I hope you'll give that some consideration as we go forward.

Let's go back to this trust issue.

Ms. Blaney mentioned Philip Brooks, who is here with us today. He is one example of many people I've heard from who have lost faith in Veterans Affairs. They've lost trust in Veterans Affairs to the point where they're being asked to provide proof for medical conditions that are, in many cases, lifelong conditions. They're being asked to provide this proof over and over again. It leads them to the point where they just don't know what to do anymore.

Philip is on a hunger strike right now because of this situation. He is certainly far from the only one, unfortunately, who is feeling this way.

There are changes—policy changes, procedure changes—and it causes them to have to relive what can be pretty traumatic experiences they may have been through, which have led them to having these lifelong conditions. They have to prove these things over and over again. It's heartbreaking.

I wonder if you can address this. I wonder if you could speak a little bit to this lack of faith, this lack of trust that many of these veterans have. I've brought it up previously, but I really hope you're taking this to heart. Can you tell us a little bit about why you think that trust doesn't exist and what you can do to fix that?

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thanks, again, Mr. Richards. I am going to start again by first of all indicating that we have to recognize that 80% of our claims are approved immediately. However, there are 20% that, of course, will go to the review board.

I think we also have to keep in mind that there are some complicated medical conditions, and the adjudicators, first of all, have to do their work to make sure the condition is related to their service. Sometimes, yes, there is medical information that's required and that doctors—

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

I'm sorry. I have to interrupt you there, because what I'm talking about specifically here are situations where veterans have proven that. They have demonstrated that, and they're being asked to do it over and over again simply because VAC has made changes to their providers, or they have made changes to their procedures or to their policies. These are individuals who have proven that it is a service-related injury, and they're being asked to prove it again.

They're saying, “Enough is enough. We're tired of having to prove this over and over again. We're tired of having to relive this situation.” It becomes humiliating to the point where they say, “I can't do this anymore. I'm not going to provide the proof again, for the 17th time.” That's the kind of situation we're talking about here.

That's what leads someone like Philip to be on a hunger strike.

Minister, please, show some compassion for these individuals. Tell us what you can do to fix this trust, to fix this lack of faith that veterans have in Veterans Affairs. What are you going to do specifically? What concrete measures are you going to take to fix it?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Excuse me.

I'd like to remind members of the committee that if you take two minutes to ask a question, you have to permit the minister to have at least one minute and a half to respond.

For now, Minister, you have only one minute to respond to that, so please be concise. Please go ahead.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Once again, Mr. Richards, there are processes that are in place, and sometimes the outcomes may not be exactly what the veterans or the applicants want. There's an appeal process that's in place for that. I think that, at all times, we need to be compassionate. We need to make sure that people receive the services that they need in a timely fashion, and we need to make sure that people—

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

Minister, it's the processes themselves that these people have the concerns about; it's the processes themselves. They're not getting—

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

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

—the ability to have the compassion that you're talking about, so what are you going to do about the process?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

I'm sorry, Mr. Richards. There is a point of order.

Mr. Casey.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Mr. Chair, you specifically directed Mr. Richards to allow the witness to be able to spend as much time answering the question as he spent posing it. He spent two minutes posing the question. He interrupted her after 12 seconds.

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

Mr. Chair, just to respond to that point of order, I will say that, as members, we're given an opportunity, a block of five minutes, to ask questions. When a minister chooses to go down a path where they've either failed to understand the question or they're not addressing the question, it's important for us, as members, to have the latitude—

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Mr. Richards, I understand you, but—

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

—to be able to—