Veterans Affairs Committee on March 25th, 2022

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Jardine, thank you for being here. Your French is impeccable. How wonderful.

I completely agree with you about the human toll in all this. It's something we absolutely must keep in mind, but obviously, it goes hand in hand with the wait times. The longer the wait times, the more people who suffer and do not receive the services they are entitled to.

In 2018, your office found significant differences—unreasonable, in fact—in the processing times for anglophone disability benefit applicants versus francophone applicants. You also identified differences in the processing times for women versus men applicants. Until about three or four weeks ago, we were under the impression that those differences had shrunk, but last week, we learned that wasn't quite true, much to our surprise.

The Library of Parliament analysts painted an entirely different picture of the situation, and it's alarming. The average difference in processing time between francophone and anglophone applications was 18 weeks, whereas the median difference was 56 weeks. Those numbers are unacceptable.

We've had a chance to discuss it at length. This morning, I was able to raise the issue in the House and ask questions about it.

Does the fact that we can't manage to get real figures come down to a lack of transparency or consistency, or an administrative issue? I'm referring to the figures that would allow for a comparison over time, of course.

That is my question, Ms. Jardine.

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

Thank you for your question. I'll try to answer in French.

Actually, I'm going to speak in English, because I have the translation in my ear.

As I said in my statement, I think we can get very much lost in the statistics. Were the numbers over this past year or over the past four years? Are we talking about averages, or are we talking about medians?

The bottom line, Mr. Chair, is that at the moment we cannot say that there are equitable wait times for all the demographics of all the veterans, whether they're male, female, anglophone, francophone or LGBTQ. There are so many ways to look at these numbers.

I would like to ask the department what the number is of first applications where veterans are waiting for a positive decision that will allow them access to the delivery of health care treatment. To me, that is the most important thing.

I understand there are differences in these gaps. In my view, no veteran, regardless of gender, orientation or the language they speak, should have to wait one minute longer than any other veteran. They should not wait at all. Their claims should be treated in the shortest amount of time possible. There should be a very clear understanding of which veterans need a decision faster than other veterans.

A veteran who has a full pension, has access to the public service health care plan and who has secured a second job after they have left the Canadian Forces may not need that decision as quickly as the veteran who does not have a pension, cannot qualify for public service health care or doesn't have access to the rehabilitation program, but was broken by the CAF and has walked out the door with their little baggie of three months' worth of medications for a condition that is related to their service. They have to wait.

I would ask, where did 16 weeks come from? They get their medications for three months, but the service standard is 16 weeks.

I hope I have answered your question, Monsieur Desilets. Thank you.

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

I understand, but here's where I disagree with you, Ms. Jardine. The wait times do matter because they have a huge impact. The government has just spent close to $200 million on trying to close the gap, but without relevant and credible statistics, what is there to justify such an investment?

It has to be based on something if the money is to be spent where it's needed.

Do you agree with me?

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

Thank you for your question.

I absolutely agree. I believe that we should be asking for that data and perhaps asking for it to be given in a disaggregated form so that we can see much more clearly all the demographics of veterans who are affected by these wait times. I absolutely concur that the investments must be able to show progress, and we, in our office, are also looking to see that progress.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you so much, Madame Jardine.

Right now, Ms. Rachel Blaney would like to ask you more questions.

Ms. Blaney, the floor is yours for six minutes. Please go ahead.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Of course, as always, I would like to extend my thanks to the ombudsperson for the work her office does. It's incredibly important and of course, Colonel Jardine, through the chair, it's always good to have a chat with you.

One of the things that really stuck out to me from your comments today was the reality that when people are waiting for their disability claim to be processed, they're often not able to afford the cost of the treatment, which means, sadly, they forgo it. I also look at the statement in which you talked about how women are often waiting considerably longer. We've heard from female veterans that their experience is unique because often what they're being assessed for is through a male-body lens. This limits the understanding of the experiences they're having, and at times they're even denied the supports that they rightfully are due because of that.

I'm just wondering if you have done, or plan to do, any work on understanding this specific issue better, and how we can help women who have served our country be served more comprehensively as veterans.

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

As a matter of fact, we will be publishing a report shortly on an investigation we did on the adjudication of sexual dysfunction, because we suspected that there was a sex-based bias in the manner in which the department was adjudicating these claims. It's sexual dysfunction as a condition or as a [Technical difficulty—Editor] or a psychological treatment.

I don't want to get too much into the report, but our investigation found that there is a sex-based bias in the manner in which these adjudication decisions are taken. We look forward to publishing that very soon and hopefully having more conversations about that.

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

Thank you, through the chair, for that important work, and I look forward to that report. I know we've heard from a lot of persons identifying as women veterans about their experiences, and there are definitely some significant gaps there.

I'm wondering if your office has ever received any calls from women veterans regarding mental health supports during pregnancy? We've heard a few in our office and I would just like to hear from the ombudsperson's office.

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

I have not had any cases brought to me directly, so I'm not aware of any myself, but my deputy ombudsperson may be able to provide more information, so I'll invite Duane to offer his perspective.

[Duane Schippers, Acting Deputy Veterans Ombud, Office of the Veterans Ombudsman]

Thank you.

We actually don't have those kinds of detailed numbers, Ms. Blaney, at least not available to us at that segmented level of detail. What I can say is that in 2021-22 we received five complaints regarding family members' access to mental health, and those dated to post the government's changes to the mental health policy.

We're still looking at family members trying to receive mental health treatment in their own right. One of those cases was an ex-spouse trying to get mental health coverage for herself and the children as a result. Again, if you need access through the veteran, once marriage breakdown occurs, that's very difficult to obtain.

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

It's sad to hear, then. It's sad to hear that the children also suffer, when I'm pretty sure they remain the children of the veteran.

I have a follow-up question on the in-home support. I understand there's going to be a follow-up investigation of that. I'm wondering if the committee could hear a bit more about what's going to happen in that investigation and if there's something particular that you're looking for.

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

I believe you're referring to the caregiver investigation—or caregiver supports—that we are looking to do. The definition of “caregiver” is fairly narrow at the moment, and we believe that this may be unfair. There are so many more types of care and people who give this care that the caregiver recognition needs to be expanded.

Perhaps I could ask Duane to offer a bit more, as he is a former director of the strategic review and analysis.

[Duane Schippers]

Thank you.

Ms. Blaney, on what we're doing right now, we decided to look at the caregiver recognition benefit in the context of all other care-at-home supports that VAC offers. We're doing a comparison and trying to identify any gaps in the services that are available to keep veterans in their homes. We couldn't look at just the caregiver recognition benefit.

One of our concerns is that as it's entitled “caregiver recognition”, clarity is needed about whether caregiver recognition is really compensating the caregiver, or whether the government is benefiting from unpaid caregivers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Schippers.

That's the end of the first round of questions. Let's start the second round with Ms. Cathay Wagantall for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you so much, Chair.

Thank you, Colonel Jardine and staff, for being here again today. It means so much to have these conversations with you. I certainly appreciate the approach you're taking in your office.

I'd like to hear a little more on the mental health aspect. We've seen little or no movement from the government on ensuring that mental health care for families of veterans can be accessed in their own right, regardless of the treatment the veteran is receiving. I know this is important to you. It was a major recommendation from this committee not that long ago.

Can you speak to the importance of the good mental health of the veteran's family members, how that actually impacts and what it means for the veteran's recovery process? Obviously, the veteran is in a bad space and the family suffers, but then the veteran sees his family suffering and that just complicates the situation. It's a cyclical issue. I'd like to hear your perspective on that from the work you've done.

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

Again, our report last year identified this exact issue and actually went a step further. The department acknowledges that the family's mental health as it affects the veteran's mental health is important, and where the family's mental health is affecting the veteran, the family members can receive VAC-funded mental health treatment. I think that recognition is very well understood, and the benefit acknowledges that.

The gap is when those family members are suffering mental health issues in their own right. I shared a couple of stories with you the last time. I don't want to go into details, but if a child is having difficulty, the family may be receiving treatment together with the veteran. However, the child might need help on their own, and that's where the gap is. If the veteran has chosen not to pursue mental health treatment or the family is separated, so that the spouse is now an ex-spouse, how do the children then get access to mental health treatment when what is affecting the children may have directly come from the fact that they are children of a member who served? That's where the gap is.

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

Their needs haven't changed; the circumstances have changed.

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

Yes, exactly.

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

Thank you so much for that.

We have consistently advocated for veterans to be connected to Veterans Affairs Canada before they leave CAF. This is something that came up at the very beginning of this government, this seamless transition and how important it is for these individuals who are being medically released to have their initial needs determined and processed in place, so that those needs are met before the individuals are medically released. That was part of that seamless transition piece.

Can you speak to how this would help the workers at VAC and improve services for both the workers at Veterans Affairs and the individual veterans by having these initial applications processed before they leave with that little bag you mentioned of three months' worth of medications?

[Col (Ret'd) Nishika Jardine]

The transition piece, because it is under the auspices of the Canadian Armed Forces, is outside of my mandate. However, as a veteran and a person who went through that process, I can tell you that I'm encouraged by what I have heard, that the Canadian Armed Forces and the department are working together to close that gap. I can't speak to what they're doing. All I can tell you is that I have heard that they are working together, and I'm encouraged by that. We look forward to hearing what solutions they look to put in place.

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

Right. I know there's been a test case or a study going on of doing this, but again, as you mentioned, it's been a long time, and it's kind of fallen off the radar. I was just wondering if you were aware at all of any changes there.

In regard to the caregiver recognition benefit and its narrow application, is easier access to compensation available only to caregivers of the most seriously injured veterans? Can you speak to what effect it would have on veterans' quality of life if that access were opened up, and whether it could lessen the load on Veterans Affairs, like the long- and short-term benefits and the impact of that care at home? As you mentioned, in some ways it's off-loading some of the responsibilities of VAC, but I don't feel that the recognition is there.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Ms. Wagantall, I'm sorry to cut you off, but your time is over. It was only five minutes, so maybe on the next round you will be able to ask your question again.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

You're very welcome.

Now I'd like to go to Sean Casey for five minutes, please.

I'm going to ask the clerk if he's in the room.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Cédric Taquet]

Mr. Chair, if you want, we can suspend for one minute or 30 seconds to let Mr. Casey connect to the meeting.