Veterans Affairs Committee on Oct. 8th, 2026

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I appreciate the officials showing up today.

I have a couple of questions.

One of the comments the minister made in her opening testimony was about steps to make life easier for veterans. I want to work through that. This is maybe a working question.

Veterans have come into my office and have called me concerning the fact that when they are assessed with PTSD by Veterans Affairs, that is one and done. However, every two years, when it comes to tax for the Canada Revenue Agency, they have to resubmit. They get traumatized again by the Canadian government.

I know these veterans know the difference, because they know different departments. When they look at the government, they're looking at the government as.... They're being mistreated by the government, and they're being retraumatized.

Is there any way you can work to break down the silos between your departments so that veterans do not have to go through this every two years with the Canada Revenue Agency and continually prove to another department within the government that they are suffering from PTSD?

[Mitch Freeman]

I want to highlight that from a federal point of view, many of the benefits for veterans are delivered by many departments, as you're highlighting. We have some pretty tight integration between our colleagues at ESDC, CRA, Indigenous Services Canada, CAF, DND and the RCMP to ensure we can minimize that to the best of our ability.

It's an ongoing evolution of the delivery of all our processes—whether that is from a veteran-centric, front-end client point of view or is about data sharing, technology, information, etc.—to ensure that our services, from a Veterans Affairs, ESDC, ISC or CRA point of view, are delivered in an efficient and effective manner to limit that traumatization to a veteran.

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

I want it on the record that I want to see this situation solved for veterans.

I'm asking this department for that. I can't direct you; the minister can. I'm highlighting this on behalf of veterans who are continually being traumatized when they're going through taxation services and other departments. Somehow, the bureaucracy and red tape they have experienced must get minimized in order to expedite services for veterans.

As for my next question, nine times out of 10, the appeal board rules for veterans. If I'm watching a sports game and the referee gets overruled many times by the VAR, I start looking at the referee and the quality. What are you changing in your department so that it gets things right for veterans the first time?

Here, we're seeing that there will be a cut of services. Everybody is saying it's not a cut of services, but it is a cut of services. It's a reduction. Veterans are now going to get backlogged. They're going to get rejections. That's what we're seeing. We have a backlog of 10,000 veterans who are not getting assessed properly.

What are we going to do on the front end to get things better and right the first time?

[Mitch Freeman]

Thank you for the question.

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

You seem to be getting all the questions, Mr. Freeman.

[Mitch Freeman]

That's quite okay. I'm happy to provide good-quality answers.

This is, in fact, the goal of the service modernization project that was funded through budget 2025. It's to look at the veteran journey from application through to decision, to appeal and to pay and benefits for the veteran. That service modernization effort looks at the life journey of the veteran, including the process, the steps involved, the appeal, and the appeals that are in a particular categorization of favourability, and it brings that back to the front end of it. It's looking at the technology and at all of the systems from end to end.

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

I don't mean to cut you off, Mr. Freeman. I really do appreciate that.

Is there anything we could do that's like the Australian model, with presumptive liability? We keep talking within this department about getting that included so that veterans aren't going through an insurance program; they're being accepted right off the front end and being looked after.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

Thank you very much. I apologize.

We have five minutes, and my understanding is that we will be sharing the time.

Mr. Fanjoy, you have two and a half minutes.

[Bruce Fanjoy, Liberal, Carleton, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Witnesses, the nature of military service is such that our service members start their careers relatively young. It's the beginning of a career. That usually means they retire from military service still relatively young in the context of a lifetime, which means they have a lot of good years left to contribute to this country.

Helping the veterans move on to a productive career post-military service has to be one of the most important things we can for them, not only because it's important for them to support their families—we all understand that—but also because it's important for veterans to feel that they are continuing to contribute to the country and their communities.

Can you tell us what we are doing, and what we could do better, to help veterans make that transition to a post-military career?

[Doug Wentzell]

This touches very precisely on the work we're doing around employment. The average age of release from military service is in the mid-thirties, so we really want to make sure we're working with veterans before they conclude their service and then as they transition into civilian life.

We're doing that through a number of key pieces of work. We're doing extensive work on skills translation to make sure that military members can take the time with the expertise required to translate their skills into a civilian environment. We're also working to ensure that we improve the recognition of military training so that it translates, in a very easy and efficient way, into the employment landscape.

I would also pinpoint the work we're doing on entrepreneurship. We are expanding a number of partnerships through groups like the Business Development Bank of Canada and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada to make sure we build networks to connect veterans with resources and expertise if they want to build their own businesses following their service.

It's all really important work.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

Thank you very much.

Now, for the remainder of the time, we have Madame Auguste.

You have just under two and a half minutes. Please keep that in mind.

[Tatiana Auguste, Liberal, Terrebonne, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Veterans really come from diverse backgrounds, and their needs are diverse. Now, members of the armed forces and veterans come from all kinds of backgrounds in Canada, and they increasingly represent the Canadian population. Resources dedicated to service delivery must reach eligible individuals and make it easier for them to access programs.

With respect to service delivery resources, how is the department working to improve access to programs for veterans from different communities, including indigenous and Black communities in Canada?

[Mitch Freeman]

I can respond to that.

I'd like to take a moment to highlight that the diversity of the veteran community is rich. One of the things we saw with the census 2021 dataset.... I'll just bring to the committee's attention that it's the first time in a large number of years that we asked a question about military service, and it allowed us to gain really concrete information about the 461,000 veterans living in Canada.

We know the percentage between male and female. We know the percentage of indigenous people serving. In fact, there are more indigenous people, from a population point of view, in the military than in Canada—by 1.5%. It's really rich.

It has allowed us to formulate our engagement plans for these communities appropriately. We have a group that looks for and interacts with indigenous veterans organizations, women veterans organizations, and Black and racialized veterans across the board to ensure that all of the inbound engagement with the Department of Veterans Affairs is inclusive of that lived experience. Then they look at that from an evolutionary point of view around policy development and around service delivery development to make sure that.... As we've said at this committee time and time again, historically all of that research has been male-focused, and that is changing and continuing to change.

[Tatiana Auguste, Liberal, Terrebonne, QC]

In the 20 seconds I have left, could you please tell us about the awareness campaign the minister talked about earlier?

[Mitch Freeman]

I might need a refresher on that. I apologize.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

You're out of time.

Thank you very much.

[Tatiana Auguste, Liberal, Terrebonne, QC]

Thanks.

[Mitch Freeman]

I do apologize to the member.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

That's okay.

Mrs. DeBellefeuille, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Claude DeBellefeuille]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

We know that there are currently many vacant buildings owned by the Department of National Defence. There is one in my colleague's riding in Amherst. Everyone around the table is wondering what is preventing the Department of Veterans Affairs, if it is convinced that this building could be used to provide services to veterans, from making an offer to transfer it from the Department of National Defence to the Department of Veterans Affairs.

I know there's a motion being debated but, as far as I'm concerned, it's as if we're wasting our time. If the Department of Veterans Affairs has assessed the needs of veterans and determined that the building in Amherst is suitable, it seems to me that the minister should take the lead and ask the Department of National Defence to transfer the building to her so that we can better help veterans.

What is preventing Veterans Affairs Canada from taking action?

[Mitch Freeman]

Thank you very much for your question.

I would highlight that this is one of the areas of interest that another committee is studying in some detail. It's about how best to utilize these available—

[Claude DeBellefeuille]

Mr. Freeman, I told you that I only had two and a half minutes of speaking time.

I know that the debate is taking place in another committee, but personally, I think it has nothing to do with that committee. I think that, if Veterans Affairs Canada is convinced that it can provide services in the building in Amherst, it's not up to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates to prepare a report. It's up to the minister to make an offer to National Defence, convincing it that this building can meet the needs.

I think we're making things much more complicated than they need to be. Personally, I tend to agree that transferring buildings should be much easier, whether in Amherst or elsewhere, because there's a needs assessment at the core of the process. Have you assessed the needs of veterans, and are the available Department of National Defence buildings suitable for meeting those needs? That's a decision that falls to Veterans Affairs Canada.

[Mitch Freeman]

I can certainly highlight that the service delivery model for Veterans Affairs Canada has over 700 points of service across the country. The most recent client satisfaction survey highlights that nearly 49% of the cohort interacts with the department via the contact centre and another 24% or so interacts with the department via the online secure portal. That distribution of offices across the country coast to coast, as my colleague mentioned earlier, is available for that purpose.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

Thank you very much. We will now move on to Mr. Diotte.

Mr. Diotte, you have two and a half minutes. I understand that you are sharing the five minutes.

[Kerry Diotte, Conservative, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

That's right, Madam Chair.

I want to get back to the Veterans Affairs documents that show operating spending is falling by more than $225 million, while your department is projected to have 530 fewer employees than in 2024-25. How many of those positions are frontline jobs serving veterans, and why should veterans believe that these cuts won't mean longer wait times and poorer service?