Veterans Affairs Committee on Nov. 27th, 2025

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I will say it again. I think we really have everything we need to produce a report. I would recommend that we ask the witnesses—unless we cannot, but I think we can—to submit their opening remarks to our analyst.

I would seriously like us to move to a vote to complete our study. Do not beat a dead horse. We need to take action. We have studies to do. We could spend two years on the same topic, but I think it is time to act.

I am very uncomfortable with having to explain this while our witnesses are here.

As for the purpose of the study, it has a component aimed at proposing recommendations and another one where partisanship comes into play. You are experiencing that second component right now. It is the flip side of the coin. Right now, it is very difficult to say no. There may be witnesses scheduled to appear, and we absolutely want to hear from everyone.

Madam Chair, I have kept a list of witnesses. They told me that what was said mirrors exactly what they could have said. I invite my colleagues who want to take action to do so now. We have to finish this study.

Honestly, we had planned six meetings. We have had 10 meetings now. I need to leave for the holidays knowing that a report is being drafted and that we will already be thinking about solutions.

Seriously, I would like to hear what my colleagues have to say about this. It is not because I no longer want us to hear from witnesses. I find it sad to have to tell them not to appear, but they will understand very well why.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

Mr. Tolmie, you have the floor.

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

I completely disagree. I think what we're actually doing to the witness, who has already been asked to come, is shutting them down. That's the problem we've been having with Veterans Affairs.

We came with a compromise to have enough witnesses. We've already reached out to them. The clerk has already reached out to them.

Shutting them down is sanctuary trauma. We're basically saying that they are not that important, we've heard enough, we're going to move on and we're going write the report.

That is the problem we've been facing and that's the problem we've been dealing with. I find that unacceptable. We've come with a compromise. The veterans are the witnesses who have been reached out to and who are scheduled. We should accept them. They should be here. They've prepared. They've come forth with courage to share their testimony. They should be heard.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

Mr. Tolmie, I have technically a minute left. I just would like to address our witness.

please feel very comfortable leaving. You do not have to attend this part of our meeting, but you're welcome to stay. I just don't want you to feel obliged to physically stay in your seat.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Richards, you have the floor.

You have 20 seconds.

As you know, we had six and we're now at 10. I understand what Mr. Tolmie is saying. There's a possibility of having them send forward what they would say. I really want to get to, possibly, a vote on this.

Mr. Richards, please go ahead.

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

That's fine. Certainly, if the intention is to proceed, there will have to be a vote because I, like Mr. Tolmie, completely disagree with the idea that witnesses were coming here to talk about potentially being suicidal, were courageous enough to come and tell us their story, and then we tell them, “Thanks, but no thanks; we're not going to hear from you." That would be absolutely wrong. The last thing I would want this committee to do is be the cause of that sanctuary trauma ourselves.

I'll say this, though. I believe Madame Gaudreau's intention is to ensure that we get a report. I agree with that intention. Nothing in having one more meeting next week, which we already have witnesses booked for, would prevent that from happening. In my understanding, we already had the intention of doing our drafting instructions at the following meeting—the Tuesday or whatever it is on the last week we would be here—which would still allow the report to be drafted in the same time frame that it would be drafted in if we didn't have the meeting next Thursday.

I understand the intention and I agree with the intention. I just don't understand why we would cancel witnesses when we will still get a report that can be written while we're on the break.

I just cannot disagree more with telling witnesses, who would be potentially coming here to tell us some very traumatic stories they've experienced themselves, that we actually don't really want to hear from them. That would be wrong.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

Be brief, Mrs. Wagantall. I know you would like to speak.

Then we'll go to Madame Gaudreau.

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

Madame Gaudreau, this is poor trauma-informed behaviour. We have invited these people. We know the circumstances in their lives. One more meeting—

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Madam Chair, I—

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

Madame Wagantall, first, you have to address the chair.

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

I'm sorry, Madam Chair. I won't waste your time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

I do not want partisan...at this meeting. You can share through the chair, Madame Wagantall.

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

No, this is not partisan. This is people, Madam Chair, who are expecting to come. We went through this earlier. They are in a scenario where we are studying suicide.

You've heard what has been said today and now this seems totally incongruent to me that the member would suggest that we not carry through with those witnesses when they were already established. It's very poor....

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

I just want to clarify, for people who are looking at this, sadly.

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

It's okay. They understand.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

We had a motion on the floor for six. We had agreed on up to 10. We have reached the 10. There's a perspective....

Ms. Gaudreau, we are going to try to close the loop.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I will disregard what my colleague just said, because, as I just explained, I am deeply affected by all the testimonies.

I had a proposal. We do not want to retraumatize people.

Do we have the resources?

There are six witnesses. If they can come for an hour, they will come. That will satisfy the desire of some to say that the government is not doing its job.

I agree that these are important issues. We want to take action. We want a report, and we want it to move forward.

Before the holidays, will we be able to meet with the witnesses, get recommendations for the report and hold our scheduled meeting with the Minister?

The planning is up to you, Madam Chair.

Seriously, I am asking for an apology, because I do not accept that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

I have to say that I've been extremely fair in our exchange. I know I'm at the will of the committee as the chair, but when it becomes more personal and certain individuals feel attacked, it's completely inappropriate. As we are studying and preventing individuals from being traumatized, we are doing this here.

Please, I'm imploring you. Christmas is on its way. We had a very cordial approach to our meetings. I understand that there are sentiments, but I would say that sentiments are to be expressed in an objective way. I always say at the very beginning of each meeting to speak through the chair. It's not for me to suggest, but I do not think accusations are where we want to lead our conversation.

It is 10:20.

Mrs. Wagantall, please go ahead.

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

Thank you, Chair.

I would recommend that we simply move forward.

Chair, I'm speaking to you. I apologize. There was no intent to cause duress.

My question is this: Why did we book these people for another meeting if the intention of the room was to not have another meeting? That's why I'm a little confused. We now have to go and apologize to these people in these circumstances. That's all.

I would recommend that we just go to the vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

That's a fair question, Mrs. Wagantall.

With the way a motion is presented, as chair, I have to fulfill the obligation of having individuals who can come in front of us. We could do this until June or September next year. As we have reached our 10, the practice is to suggest that we should do a review. It's not to undermine the importance of every other individual who may think they could come and present.

I have to apologize to all of the individuals who might have chosen to come and present in front of us. What I would say to each individual, as it's always been a good practice, is that they are able to send documents—the brief and the information they would like to share—and we will take them into consideration.

I'm still going through the list.

Mr. Richards, please go ahead.

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

I would ask all members around this table today to remember why we're here. We're here to serve the veterans who we are here to represent at this committee and make recommendations to try to make sure that we do what's right by them.

I don't believe there's ill will on the part of Madam Gaudreau here at all. I think her intention is to make sure we get a report, and I agree with that intention. It's important that we hear from veterans, but it's also important that we make recommendations to be able to take action.

I want to point out that there's nothing in having this one more meeting on December 4, I believe it is, that would prevent that from happening or slow that down. My understanding is that we have the intention to do drafting instructions at the following meeting. We can get the report under way just as quickly and still hear from these witnesses.

I want to make it clear again. These people are booked to come. It's not like we're making a decision to add meetings here. The motion was to have a minimum of 10 meetings. This would create an 11th meeting. In fact, it's not creating an 11th meeting; it's continuing with a meeting that was already scheduled and planned and for which witnesses, including veterans who have had traumatic experiences.... I just don't understand how anyone could suggest that we phone up a witness who was a veteran and who has had a traumatic experience and say that we did want to hear from them, but now we no longer want to hear from them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

Mr. Richards, I don't have the resources of this place.

As I said, Mr. Richards, I understand your perspective.

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

I don't know what that would do to a veteran. I just—

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

We completely agree with you. I'm going to suspend for a minute to release our witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

I call the meeting back to order.

Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

There are a number of points to consider.

We did not have a chance to have a discussion beforehand about the number of meetings. According to the clerk, the witnesses had already been instructed to appear before the committee. That is a very important point.

We need to have recommendations in order to write our report. We have the opportunity to reduce the number of meetings from two to one. That would still allow us to hear the testimonies and get to the bottom of the issue. I think it is extremely important to have the recommendations and to already plan the next studies.

I am comfortable with that. I move that we agree to hear the witnesses who wanted to appear before the committee in a one-hour block, whether there are four, five or six of them. Then we can prepare for committee business.