Veterans Affairs Committee on Dec. 12th, 2023

[Steven Harris]

—where claims, be they disability or otherwise, are being made.

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

Yes, I understand that you ask for what you need. However, you don't always see everything or know whether there's something you should have that you aren't aware you should have.

Why is it that you don't have access to them and veterans don't have access to them?

[Steven Harris]

Veterans can get access to their medical files, but it's not through Veterans Affairs Canada. They can make the request to be able to access their medical file—

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

This is not a seamless transition, sir.

[Steven Harris]

We would not have a veteran's entire medical file. We're not considered to have a need to have an entire veteran's medical file, from a privacy point of view and others.

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

I have 30 seconds and a quick question.

The $2 million for research projects comes from a transfer from the Department of National Defence—$1.65 million. I would like to know whether that's coming from their research funding or a different source. Also, for the reallocation of internal resources, where did the $350,000 come from that was added to that for research projects?

[Pierre Tessier]

I'll answer the question.

The funding that comes from the CAF and DND comes from their research area. That's my understanding.

[Sara Lantz]

The $350,000 that you see coming internally within the department is really just a change in how PSPC advised us we should be moving the money—from a contract base to traditional grants and contributions—to fund the research. It was just an internal transfer across the vote to appropriately fund the research.

It's all the same money.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much.

Now let's get to Mr. Sean Casey for five minutes, please.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to start with Mr. Harris.

Mr. Harris, during Mrs. Wagantall's questions, it seemed as though there were a few occasions where you were trying to provide a more complete answer and were prevented from doing so, specifically on the subject of a seamless transition between DND and VAC. If there is any information that you want to share with the committee that you weren't able to, this is your chance.

[Steven Harris]

Thank you very much.

I would just try to explain the purpose for which Veterans Affairs obtains medical files in looking at a veteran's application for any number of programs, most specifically disability benefits. We do access information from the Canadian Armed Forces and the Department of National Defence in support of those applications for which we have to determine a service relationship for an injury or illness that's been suffered by a Canadian Armed Forces member, transitioning member or veteran.

We only ask for the information relevant to the disability, illness or injury that they are looking for so that we don't access, inappropriately, an entire file of information on medical history or otherwise that we don't actually need to render a decision for a particular benefit. We only access that part. The file remains the property of the Department of National Defence, ultimately, for the individual veteran of the Canadian Armed Forces or the member.

We do have still-serving Canadian Armed Forces members who make applications. That information, again, comes when they make the application. In the need or intent to provide seamless transition, our interests and our obligation are to try to make sure that all of the benefits that need to be in place to help support somebody going through a transitory process are in place before that person transitions. We work very diligently with the Canadian Armed Forces to do so.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Thank you.

Now I would like to bring the conversation back to the estimates, and I'm going to take a page out of Ms. Blaney's book. Whoever feels that they have the information with which to answer, feel free to pipe up.

Mr. Tolmie talked about the fact that there are so many people with hearing loss claims who find themselves in front of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board. Their appeals are upheld. In the estimates that were voted on the other night, there was $15 million dedicated to the modernization of IT infrastructure to make advancements in process automation for the most common medical conditions. I understand that tinnitus and hearing loss are two of them.

If the Conservatives had gotten their way and had successfully blocked this investment, what would the impact be on the processing of these types of claims?

[Steven Harris]

Perhaps I can offer some insight on the actual processing.

I'm not trying to speak exactly to the impact in the way in which the question is framed but to earlier questioning and information shared related to how often something is approved or not approved, how difficult it is or why the Veterans Review and Appeal Board approves something.

With respect to tinnitus, it's actually approved 93% of the time on first application. Hearing loss is 82%. Our overall first-application approval rate is 90%. The question then becomes, why does the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, for example, approve a number of hearing loss or tinnitus claims when the appeals come to it?

In many cases, it is using new information. In other words, the veteran is submitting new information as part of the application on the appeal. Therefore, the Veterans Review and Appeal Board has information at that point in time that was not available to the Veterans Affairs decision-maker. That is particularly true because in a decision letter that would say that a particular application is not going to be approved, we point out where the lack of evidence is. When a veteran comes back through the appeals process, it is with very specific information as to the kinds of things that need to be shown as evidence to be able to get a positive decision.

That's likely why the approval rate of Veterans Review and Appeal Board decisions is much higher on those than what might have been presented as an application that didn't have all the evidence at that time.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

There was one measure contained in the estimates that the Conservatives didn't get the chance to vote against and that was the additional funding of $800,000 for the veterans emergency fund, which was the result of an internal reallocation. Why is that important?

[Steven Harris]

We have a number of veterans who obviously have come forward. An emergency fund was set up through our new program about five years ago to be able to respond to veterans in crisis, in emergencies, who need short-term assistance on any number of things. It could be something related to immediate housing. It could be related to medical expenses and/or others.

The program is slightly oversubscribed. In other words, the allocation for the department is $1 million annually. However, our experience has been that we require somewhere in the neighbourhood of $1.5 million or $2 million on an annual basis to help support individuals. That was a little higher in cases of COVID and others. We've reallocated money to ensure there are enough funds in the veterans emergency fund to carry through the entire fiscal year and to be able to support veterans throughout the fiscal year.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Casey.

Monsieur Desilets, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Tessier, as part of our study on women, witnesses often said that there wasn't enough research, that it wasn't sufficiently funded, etc.

Another thing that came up was the problem of coordination between research projects. What do you think about this?

[Pierre Tessier]

Thank you for the question.

On the coordination of research, I would say that there are two aspects to it. Overall, the first one is that not all research is commissioned by the Department of National Defence, CAF and Veterans Affairs. A lot of it is commissioned through academia research and interest, and priority within the civilian population.

I would say that the second portion is where and how departments—not just CAF and Veterans Affairs but also Health Canada—look at research and capitalize on that research, but also coordinate on the findings of that research and ensure there's no duplication as we plan research. To me, that is the premise of how we should look at research in the future and also use it to take evidence-based policy decisions.

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

Thank you.

You alluded to a study on the impact of military life on reproduction. It was very interesting.

Is there anything on the impact of pregnancy and post-pregnancy, i.e., children's first years of life? Witnesses have alluded to this: certain products to which they may have been exposed could have created developmental problems. I'd like a quick response, because I'm running out of time.

[Pierre Tessier]

Thank you for the question.

I don't have that at my fingertips, but if we do have it, I'd be happy to provide it to the committee.

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

Thank you.

My next question is for all of the witnesses.

Have any of you heard of women experiencing breast reduction due to so-called inadequate equipment in the Canadian Armed Forces?

[Steven Harris]

I'm not aware of any specific examples.

In general, we know that equipment can have different effects on female veterans. These are not necessary adjustments that female veterans would have made themselves, but consequences that equipment can have on them, such as different illnesses or lived experiences.

Examples, requirements and service consequences may differ from one woman to another.

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

Thank you, Mr. Harris.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Desilets.

To close this meeting, I'm pleased to invite Ms. Rachel Blaney to take her two and a half minutes, please.