Thank you.
Good afternoon, committee.
I decided prior to coming in here that I wouldn't take—hopefully—the whole five minutes, because I want to try to save as much time as possible for questions, but I do have a few points I want to highlight.
I've testified a few times on the subject of military sexual trauma and survivors. I won't belabour that a whole lot, but it's definitely going to come into play a little bit. There are currently some issues going on that should be reasonably easy to fix. One is that there is a movement among transition units and transition centres right now attempting to stop survivors from going to the media. Official emails have been sent to survivors asking them to sign a document similar to an NDA, preventing them from bringing their own stories to the media.
As we all know, that is in direct violation of other guidance that already exists for the Canadian Armed Forces, so I would urge everybody within government to engage and stop this from happening, because it is, of course, causing survivors to not only feel continued shame but also be unable to bring their own stories and everything to the media and to tell their stories the way they want to.
Along with that, there is an issue right now that is affecting me personally and that I imagine will start affecting others. Prior to highlighting this, I want to share that the last StatsCan survey showed that one in five reservists will experience military sexual trauma within their careers. Right now, with low recruiting numbers and everything else, we are leaning heavily on the primary reserves to fill spots they didn't use to, especially in trades that are a little bit harder to recruit for.
I was a public affairs officer and I was a class B reservist for the majority of my career. I worked full time as a reservist and as such I worked in Winnipeg, Edmonton and eventually Ottawa. I was released at the end of March 2022 as a class B reservist due to military sexual trauma, a service-related injury.
A reservist who leaves the military is entitled to what they call a “return home move”. It's a benefit that exists for one year after the time of release to allow the military to move the reservist back to the place they were moved from. It would move me back to Edmonton or to another location in Canada without exceeding the cost to move me home to Edmonton.
I cannot avail myself of that benefit because, when I exited the military, I was still undergoing therapy, which I'm in now. My condition has progressed to the point now where I was diagnosed with fibromyalgia this past September. However, my move benefit expired a year after service. I requested an extension and I was told that no policy existed to extend that move benefit for reservists.
Regular force members are allowed to extend what's called their “intended place of residence move”. That is allowed for two years, and then they can have an extension for up to five years after release if they have medical support to support that. It is generally granted. It's considered an easy thing to grant as a show of support for people who have exited the military due to injury. Reservists do not qualify for that extension.
It's my understanding that this is a gap that has just started to come to people's attention. It's going to affect not only me. I'm regarding it in the same way as the gaps that came to our attention after the shooting on Parliament Hill, when we lost a reservist and people all of a sudden realized that reservists didn't qualify for the same death benefits that regular force members did. This is along those same lines.
Yes, there are very necessary gaps. As a class B reservist, I make a little bit less. I don't have to move. I can apply for positions that can require me to move. Therefore, I make a little bit less. I absolutely accept that, but the fact that I am not able to get a move back to, potentially, more support or out of a house.... The house I currently live in has lots of stairs. My fibromyalgia could develop to a point where I won't be able to move around my own home, but I don't qualify for that benefit because I was a full-time reservist. I'd like to bring that to the attention of the committee.
Along with that, there are also a few lighter issues. One involves the education training benefit. People who serve in the military 12 years or less, or plus 12 years, are entitled to a certain amount of funding for an education training benefit to go to university or to pursue further education, but the use of that money is very strict. You can use it only towards something like university.
I'd like to see that policy opened up to allow people to take other kinds of courses they may be interested in or potentially to use that money to help them fund a business or an entrepreneur program or something along those lines that would allow those people to become employers themselves. I think that would be a really powerful show of support that the government could give veterans.
The final piece goes back a little bit to entrepreneurs again. I know I'm biased because I am an entrepreneur, but in the U.S., there currently exists a system under which a certain percentage of each government's yearly contracts have to go to veteran-owned businesses. They also have a separate category for disabled veteran-owned businesses and another category for female veteran-owned businesses. They are small percentages in the grand scheme of things, and it doesn't necessarily mean that you're guaranteed, but it does mean that you can apply for certification as one of those businesses. That might open up a whole world of other opportunities to you.
Those are my points. Thank you.