Veterans Affairs Committee on March 22nd, 2022

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Also, thank you for bringing up “boilerplate”. I've used that several times, and not a lot of people outside of the military understand that term and its meaning. I have to say thank you very much for that.

Part of the process was to raise awareness. I think that was obviously to recognize a lot of the mistakes that we in the military had made in the past. My question, Sergeant Usherwood, would be, do you feel that would be important training for the caseworkers and file workers, for them to know a little more when they're dealing with a file? I'm not sure if that's part of their job description and whether they're aware of what we've gone through.

What are your thoughts on that?

[Sgt Nina Charlene Usherwood]

In reference to SHARP training, I've been in for 40 years and it seems that every 10 years we call it something different, because we just haven't changed what is the culture of the military. It's still pretty macho, so we end up going through the same thing over and over. I am somewhat optimistic that this time we finally have the process and we're finally seeing a change.

In my own experience with SHARP training, it was used as a check in the box. Once you had the check, you had your training and you were good to go. If that's all it is, it's meaningless. In the forces right now, they're actually doing something called “Respect in the CAF”. Something like that can't just be an hour-long talk by someone talks to you. It actually needs to be communication. Something like that would be more useful, I feel. Thank you for the question, though.

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

I really appreciate your honesty on that question. As I said, I think that if that new training is successful, then maybe it could be implemented in the hiring practice and part of the training for Veterans Affairs caseworkers.

Ms. Laverdure, I appreciate that this will be probably translated. When I look at what was mentioned earlier on by Ms. Perron, which was that a service member is a service member and a vet is a vet, it doesn't matter what your language preference is. Do you feel that having more caseworkers is going to solve the problems that our francophone service members are dealing with? Or is there something else that you think needs to be added rather than just coming up with, as has been mentioned before, a tick in the box?

[Brigitte Laverdure]

Thank you for the question.

Over the past few years, I have spoken with many case managers from across the province, in Saint‑Jean‑sur‑Richelieu, in Montreal, in Quebec City, in Gatineau, and they aren't the problem. The problem is the workload that the department imposes on them. Some have to manage 25, 30 or 40 cases at the same time. For them, talking about the veteran isn't the problem.

At the same time as the case managers start processing veterans' files, there could be liaison officers who would follow up on the claims. These officers would be called upon to contact the veteran to inform them of the status of the file. That would be the least the department could do, and veterans would feel less left to their own devices. Case managers certainly can't see everything; they don't make decisions about claims.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Ms. Laverdure and Mr. Tolmie.

Mr. Casey, you now have the floor for five minutes.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll pick up where Mr. Tolmie left off with Ms. Laverdure. I don't have any questions, but I would like to make a comment, if I may.

Ms. Laverdure, I'm the member of Parliament for Charlottetown, and I'm a member of the Liberal Party. The facts presented by Mr. Desilets are not at all acceptable. I admire your work, and as the Liberal member of Parliament for Charlottetown, I'm committed to addressing this issue and bringing pressure to bear. This is not at all acceptable.

Thank you for your testimony.

I want to concentrate most of my questions to you, Ms. Douglas. Part of the reason for that is my personal interest. I was a litigator in a previous life.

You started with the fact that you launched a case against the government in or about 1992, a case that resulted in a change in government practice in 1992, and now you find yourself in a spot that was created as a result of class action litigation related to veterans.

I'm interested to hear a bit more about the story. Can you talk a bit about the 1992 litigation, please?

[Michelle Douglas]

Well, I really was devastated to be fired by the Canadian Armed Forces. I was a top performer when I was there, but it didn't matter.

In the 1980s, the policy said, if you're LGBT, you can stay, but no promotions, no pay raise, no training and no postings. It was a pretty devastating policy to operate under.

I was fired anyway, and that's when I launched my lawsuit. It had the effect of giving me a bit of justice back in 1992, but we all know that justice for one person is not really justice at all. We know that thousands of others who experienced this purge didn't get justice when the policy ended because of my lawsuit. It took until much later, 2018, until members of the class action could get some justice in that class action lawsuit.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

So you were a lone litigant, who was terminated in 1989, and by 1992 the policy of the government had changed because of you as an individual suing the government?

[Michelle Douglas]

That's exactly right. It was one of the very first section 15 cases under the charter. On the eve of a three-week trial at Federal Court, the federal government settled out of court with me, and at that moment ended the codified policy of discrimination in the Canadian Armed Forces. I should say that ending discrimination by policy and ending discrimination in a more subtle way are two entirely different things.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

That's an absolutely inspiring story.

The LGBTQ purge lawsuit was commenced in 2016 and settled in 2018. Is that right?

[Michelle Douglas]

That's right. There were about 720 members of that class.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Would you agree with me that in terms of the progress of class action litigation that's lightning fast?

[Michelle Douglas]

I think it is, based on my awareness of these things. It also set for a settlement the greatest settlement in the world, to my knowledge, for LGBT reconciliation outcomes from a class action lawsuit.

However, I would say that no matter what was paid to LGBT purge survivors, making them whole is still taking a lot of work. These folks, and let me add myself to this, are really shattered by what happened to us. The humiliation we experienced at the hands of the military left some pretty deep scars.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Ms. Douglas, thank you so much for your commitment to justice over so many years, both personally and on behalf of so many others who have been discriminated against. It really is inspiring. I have much respect for you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Casey.

We'll now have two quick interventions of two and a half minutes each.

Mr. Desilets, you have the floor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My time is limited, but I will ask you a question. In my first intervention, I saw the dismay on the faces of the participants about the numbers that were provided. I just heard Mr. Casey say the same thing, that he also seems to want the true figures.

I don't know the procedure, but I'd like us to ask the minister to clarify the figures he provided to the committee. Perhaps a mistake was made. In any case, there is an astronomical discrepancy, which is unacceptable. It would be nice if he could clarify the figures, perhaps give us the data according to the years. The figures he has given us may be accurate, but when I look at the averages and the median, I have my doubts. As I said, I didn't provide those figures.

I think you are aware of the problem. Since you were the chair of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, you would be very skilful in writing a letter, if the committee agrees, asking the minister and all his resources to clarify this for us.

We are swimming in the dark. Three weeks ago, everything was clear to me, I was happy, and now I feel like breaking down doors. Do we need more money? Maybe we don't need any more if these numbers are correct. Three weeks ago, I asked that these hires be made permanent, that we hire these people full‑time. We were told that it may not be necessary.

If we had clear numbers, we could base our future actions on reliable data and better support our committee's conclusion when we write our report.

That concludes my remarks. I don't know if it's possible for us to send this letter.

What do you think, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

I did stop the clock to respect your time, Mr. Desilets. Your intervention stems from the document produced by the library analysts.

After consulting with the clerk, I can confirm that I have the right to write to the minister on behalf of the committee. If we don't get an answer, the committee could adopt a motion, if necessary, to make our request in that regard.

Mr. Caputo, you have the floor.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Desilets used most of his time as an intervention. I believe I have six minutes coming up. I'm prepared to give him three of my minutes, in the event he wishes to ask an actual question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you for your collaboration.

Mr. Desilets, and to the committee members as well, it's agreed that the clerk and I will look into the matter and write to the minister as soon as possible, perhaps enclosing a copy of the document prepared by the library analysts, for clarification.

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

As I understand it, we don't need the committee's approval.

Is that correct?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

We don't need it. It's done.

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

Great.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

You have a minute left.

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

You just gave me three.