Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs
OTTAWA, Wednesday, April 28, 2010
The Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence met this day at 12:16 p.m. to study the services and benefits provided to members of the Canadian Forces; to veterans; to members and former members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and their families (topic: implementation of the New Veterans Charter).
Senator Tommy Banks (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Honourable senators, this is a meeting of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, which is meeting today to hear from our minister. I would like to introduce the people present: Senator Pierre Claude Nolin; Senator Fabian Manning, the deputy chair of this subcommittee; Senator Pamela Wallin, the chair of our parent committee, the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence; Senator Michael Meighen was the distinguished chair of this subcommittee for many years; General Cox is our analyst from the Library of Parliament; Kevin Pitman is the committee clerk; Senator Roméo Dallaire; Senator Joseph Day was also a previous chair of this committee; and Senator Percy E. Downe who is also from the minister's department home base, Prince Edward Island.
We have the honour to have with us today the Honourable Jean-Pierre Blackburn, P.C., M.P., Minister of Veterans Affairs and Minister of State (Agriculture). He is accompanied by Ms. Suzanne Tining, Deputy Minister. The minister has time constraints. I hope we could prevail upon Ms. Tining to stay with us for a while after the minister is obliged to leave.
I have admonished our members to be as brief and concise as possible because of your time constraints. Please make your opening remarks, and I hope you will then be agreeable to receive questions from us.
[Translation]
The Honourable Jean-Pierre Blackburn, P.C., M.P., Minister of Veterans Affairs and Minister of State (Agriculture): Thank you Mr. Chair. Members of the standing committee, this is the first time I have had the honour to speak before the committee since I was appointed Minister of Veterans Affairs, over three months ago, and it is indeed an honour to be here.
They have been three full months, during which time I have become familiar with what is at stake for the traditional war-time and modern-day veterans in our country. Three months during which I was fortunate to be able to converse with many of these veterans, and also many members of their families. I have a vivid and often moving memory of these encounters.
[English]
Like you, I am privileged to work on behalf of those who gave so much to our country. I am looking forward to our work together. I would like to maintain clear and open lines of communication with you. Canada's veterans deserve nothing less than our total constructive collaboration.
We are going through a difficult period characterized by various challenges. Notably, they are a demanding economic climate, Canada's role in Afghanistan and demographic changes arising in our clientele.
Therefore, the Veterans Affairs Canada is undergoing important changes because of the demographics of our aging veterans. We currently serve 42 per cent of our traditional wartime veterans. Over the last 65 years, we have met the needs of these veterans as they advance in age. We also had to learn how to adapt to meet the needs of modern-day veterans. Our programs are evolving as a result of this reality.
[Translation]
The number of modern-day veterans grows each day. We expect that, around 2015, Canada will have three times as many modern-day veterans as veterans from the Second World War and the Korean war. The recent death of the last Canadian who served in the First World War, Mr. John Babcock, illustrates this evolution.
I realize that none of this is new to you. I am just grateful to be here today to discuss my priorities as minister, and also other questions of importance to all of us.
As you well know, the mandate of our department is twofold. First, it is to offer services and benefits to our clients that meet their needs and the needs of their families. The department meets its responsibilities through various programs. These include programs for disability pensions, veterans' allowances, pension advocacy, health care and commemoration. But today, our department must adapt these programs to a new environment, because we serve not only an established clientele, but also a new generation of men and women of the Canadian Forces who will soon be returning to civilian life. As the second part of our mandate, the Department of Veterans Affairs must also ensure that the sacrifices of those who served Canada are never forgotten. In this regard, we must pay particular attention to Quebec. And I would say, as an aside to senators that what I have noted is indeed real. In Quebec, less attention is paid to the Department of Veterans Affairs. The issue of our military history, and of veterans, is less part of the culture. For the last few weeks I have considered it my duty, each time I deliver a speech, regardless of the type of activity I undertake, to spend three or four minutes at the beginning of my presentation to speak about the department and present a brief history. Recently, on April 9, when we were celebrating the victory at Vimy Ridge, we paid tribute to Mr. Jack Babcock, First World War veteran, recently deceased. Soon, I will be going to Holland. Each time I do this, you would be surprised at how interested people are. Immediately people come up to me to say that they were not aware of these facts.
It is arduous work, but we must do this consistently in Quebec.
In order to illustrate the commitment of francophones, we launched our website "La force francophone" last February. This site highlights the sacrifices and accomplishments of French Canadians, combatants and civilians, during the Second World War. We should be proud of this initiative. We invited our veterans to share their experience on the website on a dedicated thumbnail. It is well done and it is another wonderful step that we have taken.
For the last two years, we have made significant progress in a number of areas. I would like to cite the following examples: the Veterans Bill of Rights; our Mental Health Strategy; expansion of the Veterans Independence Program, to help clients and their survivors remain healthy and independent in their own homes or community; payments to those who suffer from health problems due to exposure to Agent Orange; and improvements to services related to the New Veterans Charter.
[English]
We put this charter into place with great success. It brings radical changes to the way we have been taking care of our traditional wartime and modern-day veterans for the last 65 years. It goes beyond mere financial support for modern-day veterans to provide a new approach that considers, first and foremost, the well-being of those who benefit from this support.
Previously, veterans who were wounded in the line of duty received disability benefits and related medical benefits. Even though disability pensions and payments are an essential form of compensation, they do not necessarily encourage a harmonious return to civilian life. The new approach, based on well-being and a positive return to individual civilian life, includes the lump sum disability award, a one-time, tax-free payment that allows recipients to immediately begin planning for the future.
[Translation]
Later on, during the question and answer session, if you have any further questions on this point, I could provide you with additional information, as needed.
[English]
Combined with the other programs included in the charter, this can help affected veterans and their families begin a new life together. This lump sum, of course, only represents a part of the existing support network. There is also a monthly pension during rehabilitation. Our veterans do not have to choose between one or the other; they get both.
[Translation]
These services and benefits that we offer to our clients and their families give them the opportunity to make a new life after they have been wounded in service to their country. They also provide a safety net that they can fall back on, if necessary.
So far 20,700 clients and family members have taken advantage of the benefits offered by the charter. Even if the charter can be perfected, it still is showing positive results we are very proud of it.
Veterans Affairs Canada and the Department of National Defence have worked together to create a network of support centres in order to coordinate access to key services for injured or ill personnel. We are present in 19 integrated personnel support centres. These centres are located on Canadian Forces bases across the country. Each centre serves as a sort of one-stop service for its intended clientele.
Our department has also increased the number of operational stress injury clinics to 10. Incidentally, on March 24 this year, I announced the official opening of the Residential Treatment Clinic for Operational Stress Injuries at St. Anne's Hospital in Montreal.
Our department listens to Canadians. We are constantly evaluating and trying to improve the services we offer our clients. One example is the reduction of wait times tied to requests for benefits. Our stakeholders and organizations such as the veterans ombudsman; the New Veterans Charter advisory group; different agencies; hearings such as those that bring us here today; and research, such as the study we have commissioned from Statistics Canada about life after military service, contribute to the pursuit of this goal.
There are challenges. But we are determined to overcome them. Something that we must improve is the way that we get the word out. One recent example of how we have done this is Veterans Week 2009, with the theme: "How will you remember"? The event was a great success, thanks, in part, to our use of innovative techniques and social media like Facebook and Youtube to help make the public aware of the importance of remembrance. This campaign reached 8 million Canadians.
We will never lose sight of one of the most crucial aspects of our mandate, which is commemoration. Beyond the programs and services provided by Veterans Affairs Canada, we must never forget the debt of gratitude that we owe to those who risked or gave their lives in service to our country.
[English]
Canadians share this commitment. This is why our government included in its 2010 budget the sum of $1 million per year for a new community support program. This money will be used to create new commemorative war memorials. The program is available to communities to allow them to honour the sacrifices and accomplishments of our veterans.
Finally, we continue to work closely with the National Defence on issues of common interest.
[Translation]
I am well aware of the keen interest that you have in all the concerns I have just outlined. I am also well aware of the depth of your knowledge about issues that relate to the condition of our Veterans.
I would be delighted to speak with you about the improvements that are underway at this time. I would also like to hear your comments and suggestions about how we can better serve Canada's veterans in the future.
[English]
The Chair: Thank you very much, minister. We welcome you to your new responsibilities, for which we have the highest regard. I can assure you that we will be asking to you come back again when we learn a little more about our end of the business, and we are delighted that you are accompanied today by your deputy minister.
Colleagues, because the minister has to leave at a specific time, I will ask you to be even more concise than usual with questions. I will be following the tradition of members first, but hopefully everyone will have the opportunity to ask a question of the minister.
Senator Manning: Welcome, minister. This is a learning experience for us, too. Mr. Minister, I will touch on the major increases in the costs of the disability pension system. I understand that the client population of Veterans Affairs Canada has increased by 75 per cent, from 23,600 in 2001 to 42,000 in 2005. The increase in costs has been from $5.6 billion in 2001 to a little over $11 billion in 2005. Could you take a few moments to expand on the department's experience? The costs have almost doubled. I realize that with the war in Afghanistan, we might be running into increased numbers of soldiers returning with disabilities. Could you give us an idea of what is happening?
[Translation]
Mr. Blackburn: Allow me to clarify that since the implementation of the New Veterans Charter, we have added amounts to our budgets to face the increasing costs for our Department of Veterans Affairs.
Since the implementation of the charter, 20,700 people have benefited from various services. We now know that there are two types of payments. One is a lump sum payment related to the injuries sustained. A committee analyzes the different injuries suffered by the veteran and as a result of that, the person receives a lump sum payment; to a maximum of $276,000 if we round out the numbers. Often, in the media, there is talk about the lump sum payment, but they forget about the second part.
The second part is intended for veterans who are in rehabilitation programs, and may allocate an amount that can go up to 75 per cent of their salary until they have found civilian employment, comparable to what they had before in terms of income. There is a connection between these two components.
Throughout all of this, I will not deny that we have heard criticisms of the lump sum payment. I even went to Valcartier, to the Ombudsman Mr. Strogan's hearings, where veterans and their families were complaining about the fact that giving them a lump sum payment, these people were not "able" to make the right decision as to the use of those funds. They preferred going back to the old system, when they were allocated a monthly payment.
At one point, there were comments saying that we should offer them the choice. In my opinion, if they are not "able," do they have the capacity to choose? Perhaps not.
This is of concern to me. I was wondering if it was possible they might be right, that these people are not able to make an appropriate decision when they receive a substantial amount of money.
We launched a survey with our veterans on the issue of the money that they received. Unfortunately, the data gathered does not allow me to make an appropriate decision. We asked the department to redo this study, to redo the questionnaire so that when we have the results, we will be able to do a scientific study with results that will be justifiable before our peers.
I want to know what the truth is regarding how these amounts received were spent. If ever we find misuse, we will not be able to ignore it. We will have to make decisions accordingly. Remember the lump sum payment for the rehabilitation payments.
As far as the amounts concerned, of the 20,700 people who received benefits under the new charter, 4,010 were eligible for the rehabilitation program, 3,515 were eligible for the income loss allowance and it continues in that way. And 18,400 received disability awards granted since April 2006.
There are costs, but at the same time, in the long term, given that our veterans are passing away at a faster rate today, we believe that a certain balance will be re-established, but we will see. We will adjust to the new reality.
[English]
Senator Manning: For clarification, the lump sum payment is separate from other avenues of financial assistance, rehabilitation, reintegration, et cetera. Therefore, the other benefits are in addition to that lump sum payment. Is that correct?
[Translation]
Mr. Blackburn: Indeed, it is completely separate. It is a separate amount they are allocated in light of the seriousness of the injury. In other words, if the person loses one, two or several limbs, the amounts are determined under the charter that they were allocated.
If the person is unable to return to work or if he or she cannot return to civilian life because of their disability, other amounts are allocated to them because of this reality. The person would need extra help.
The new charter is the fundamental aspect. It is based on a return to civilian life, whereas for our traditional veterans, who are 86 or 88 years old today, a totally different concept is operative.
Today, we can no longer believe that a soldier will return from Afghanistan at the age of 35 and receive a monthly amount until he or she dies. That is no longer the reality. People are embracing this concept. They want to return to civilian life. For some, more time is needed because of psychological or other types of injuries, but our program is intended to guide them towards a return to civilian life.
Senator Dallaire: Your initiative in Quebec did not go unnoticed. In his history book, when my son was in Grade IV, there were 16 pages on the 1837 rebellion and 4 pages on the Second World War, including two and a half of which were pictures and the rest spoke about the emancipation of women during this period.
Much progress remains to be made and I hope that you will be able to influence the Ministry of Education in Quebec, and that veterans and their families that served their country will be better recognized, even though today we can see there is a much more positive attitude towards the military.
I would like to come back to the new charter and its methodology. I know that you have a New Veterans Charter Evaluation Plan for the end of 2010. I have been here since 1997, I was here at the time of the Neary report that brought in the new charter, and one year later, your government finally implemented it. We have been tinkering with it for three years and the time had come to do an assessment of it.
To what degree were the staff in Charlottetown and in Ottawa trained and guided in how to manage the old charter that was still in effect and had its way of functioning, and a new charter that had a completely different philosophy? How much training was provided? We were told that there were 16,000 hours of training, that perhaps 100,000 hours were needed. You saw fit, with the new charter, to set up a school within the department in order to deal with the technical content and this different culture in the way of seeing the veteran and his or her needs and to assure yourself that the situation was well understood by your staff.
Mr. Blackburn: I will begin and our deputy minister will certainly be in a position to flesh out this subject of training.
First, we had already put in place a special team responsible for giving guidance to the people coming back from Afghanistan and accelerating the process.
Also, we have 19 centres spread across our military bases in order to serve the military on the front lines as well as those who are going to leave because their term has not been renewed, or once again to serve our veterans who require information.
Furthermore, we are trying to reduce the wait periods for services delivered to our military. It is a long process, whether we are talking about applications for disability pensions or even for subsequent re-evaluations. I am not talking about a snail's pace, but it is long.
Senator Dallaire: And torture.
Mr. Blackburn: The department is aware of this situation and we are in the process of significantly reducing the delay, by bringing it down from 24 to 16 weeks. It is not impossible that we improve this situation even more, because the ultimate goal is to serve these people adequately.
Simultaneously, even though the minister decides that he wants this or that, we must deal with certain realities. For example, if a person needs a medical exam, but cannot receive it, we are paralyzed, and this type of situation is out of our control.
Suzanne Tining, Deputy Minister, Veterans Affairs Canada: Briefly, one of the core values of the Department of Veterans Affairs is that our employees are deeply committed to serving veterans. In my opinion, our department is one of the most highly regarded as far as employee commitment is concerned. Our employees face significant challenges, given the number of old and new programs and services that are provided. Today, our greatest challenge is with regard to process and providing our employees with the tools they need to do their job. As well, there has been significant progress in terms of changes in the work culture.
For some of our employees, it was too much to deal with the "new veterans," not only because they did not have the right tools to help these people, but they also felt it was difficult to meet expectations, and so they were transferred elsewhere within the department. We have to find a new way of providing services.
Therefore, as far as the work culture is concerned, I would say that a lot has already been achieved. As the minister just said, we need to focus on tools and business processes, and make the system less painful while modernizing our operations.
Senator Dallaire: I hope that these efforts will continue. Changing employees is tantamount to changing the culture and the charter. Mr. Minister, as you were advised in writing, this charter gives you more authority than our predecessor had to bring about change, which means that you will not have to constantly press your cabinet colleagues or Parliament to make any more changes.
I know that negotiations regarding Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue are well underway, as well as discussions regarding the new clinic to treat veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress. The new generation of veterans is dealing with significant psychological stress. The numbers speak for themselves: from 1 per cent in 2002, we went to 8 per cent in 2008. For some people, it takes 4 years, one of my colleagues needed 9 years, and another one has just committed suicide after 14 years.
Will the negotiations include the possibility that Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue might receive the mandate to become a centre for research, development, assessment and instruction in the area of psychological trauma experienced by military personnel? Could the hospital become a centre of excellence in Canada by furthering the development of our expertise, so that we can hopefully ultimately reduce the number of injured veterans? After all, we do not want to go back to the way it was in 1977, when we had nothing, neither at the Department of National Defence, where I was the assistant deputy minister, nor certainly at the Department of Veterans Affairs either.
Mr. Blackburn: That is a good observation. Our government has increased the number of clinics specializing in the treatment of operational stress from 5 to 10. We have opened a clinic in a residence in Montreal about one month ago. I met some of the people there. To my astonishment, one of the people I had the pleasure of meeting was still an active member of our military.
Senator Dallaire: That is probably my driver, who is still around!
Mr. Blackburn: All this is to say that, indeed, post-traumatic stress is a reality, and people suffer from it. Unfortunately, given the new reality of the work they have to do, more and more of our troops who are coming home from Afghanistan are suffering from operational post-traumatic stress syndrome.
As well, the headquarters — correct me if I am wrong — is in St. Anne, and we already have agreements with McGill University in other related research sectors.
Ms. Tining: To clarify, regarding the transfer of St. Anne's Hospital and the provision of geriatric and psychogeriatric care, the treatment of post-traumatic stress syndrome and research will remain the responsibility of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Will the clinic stay in Saint Anne? That will have to be negotiated, but there is no doubt that the responsibility will remain with the Department of Veterans Affairs. If, as a result of the negotiations with Quebec, the terms and conditions dictate that we become tenants, so be it, otherwise we will go elsewhere, but there is no doubt that the transfer of the hospital is excluded from the negotiations.
[English]
Senator Wallin: I will try to drill down a little on the New Veterans Charter. I was glad to hear you are doing evaluations and getting a critical mass of people you can look at. One of the issues that keeps coming up with the New Veterans Charter, when it comes to pain and suffering versus earnings loss, is that the money is often given to very young returning soldiers, who may not use that money wisely. That is a judgment call, obviously, but it may be an issue.
Is that issue being looked at?
[Translation]
Mr. Blackburn: Absolutely, and that is why I was pleased to go to Valcartier and take part in the consultation session with the ombudsman, Mr. Straughen. At that meeting, young people spontaneously started talking about their problems. I even met with the mother of one of our war veterans who received financial compensation, and who also believes that changes have to be made in this regard.
We must assess our benchmarking methods based on a solid foundation. That is why we have started internal audits, because we did not want to make decisions on incomplete information. We will look into the matter even further to see how the compensation was spent — for example, whether it was used to buy a house, a car or a trip. We want to know how each amount was spent. If a person received $50,000, that is not the same as $276,000. If you have $12,000 and you go on a trip, perhaps that is less serious. This is why we must audit the data. We should have the results within the next few months, probably by Christmas.
[English]
Senator Wallin: We would love to see it when it comes through. If you could send that on to us, that would be great.
[Translation]
Senator Meighen: It is now my turn to congratulate you on your appointment. We have known each other for many years, and I am pleased to see that you have been given responsibility for such an important department, and one which we all care about. My question is not on the evolution of the charter, but rather on the efforts made by the government to follow up on the motion which was introduced in the Senate and unanimously adopted, and which calls upon the government to recognize the valour of Canadians who were members of the Bomber Squad during the Second World War.
Allow me to make a short preamble. Following a speech I gave on April 15, 2008, and one given by Senator Segal on May 6, 2008, and Senator Day on June 18, 2008, senators voted unanimously in support of the adoption of the motion to recognize the war veterans who were members of the Bomber Command.
More recently, on March 24 last, I put a question to the leader of the government in the Senate, and his reply gave me hope that we will soon see some movement regarding this important issue. Allow me to quote his reply:
The government is aware of the unanimous recommendation of the Senate and believes in its importance. Over the last while, officials have been working as quickly as possible and are mindful of the Senate resolution to explore an appropriate way to properly recognize the heroism of these individuals. Hopefully, the question of Senator Meighen will spur me and them to get moving on this, as I am well aware that some of these people are quite elderly.
Minister, do you have up-to-date information on the government's efforts to put into effect the motion that was passed unanimously in the Senate nearly two years ago? And given that this motion goes back two years and that these genuine Canadian heroes are at an advanced age, what are the next steps and the timelines for them?
Mr. Blackburn: Senator Meighen mentioned that we have known each other for a long time. In fact, if memory serves, we were both on the Beaudoin-Dobbie committee, which was a fine moment in our history.
Regarding a medal to honour members of Bomber Command, you have an ally here at the table to move forward on that. I have asked the department to prepare the groundwork for it. As is the case in any undertaking, the first thing we were told was that it was impossible and that there had already been motions in other countries.
We started with that scenario, which was not what I wanted to hear, of course. I do not want a no, but rather a yes. So how do we get to yes? It seems we need to go to the chancellery. To comply with the legal requirements and the usual way of doing things, we need to go that route, and the file should be on my desk any day now. That is where things are at. They know how much we want this.
Someone said to me yesterday: "Yes, but France said that there would be no new medals, and then another country said the same thing, but Canada is going ahead with a new one." So what? If I heard that France had decided to issue a new medal, I would be very happy about it. Someone has to be first.
I want to help you, and I am working very hard to have this happen. I cannot predict what the outcome will be, but I sincerely want to make this happen in the end. We are working on it, and I would be pleased if we could succeed.
As far as raising awareness about the achievements of our military personnel and our veterans, the fact that the new medal will be issued to some of us at public events, open to the media, provides a spotlight that is sure to be constructive and beneficial for veterans and for the department I work for.
Senator Meighen: Minister, I do not have any other questions, but I would like to make a comment. I would like to congratulate you on your new approach and your determination. As you are aware, there are various types of medals. There are ribbons and monuments of all kinds. I also congratulate you on not expressing too much fear about the bureaucratic obstacles.
Mr. Blackburn: One of the ways to overcome an obstacle is to issue the medal to those who can wear it. That condition greatly reduces the number and makes things easier. We are working on all those aspects with the aim of following through on the request.
[English]
The Chair: Senator Meighen has been assiduous in his pursuit of this end. We look forward to having results.
Senator Downe: You have been in the department a little over three months. What are your views on the treatment the department provides for post-traumatic stress disorder? Is there anything new they should be doing, or should they continue with the current programs?
[Translation]
Mr. Blackburn: I think that the department is a constructive partner in this new reality. As we know, there is now scientific proof that people suffer from post-traumatic symptoms, and it is in that context that we are taking positive steps to support our veterans.
In order to reflect our commitment, we doubled the number of clinics from 5 to 10. According to the statistics, more people suffer from post-traumatic stress symptoms, and they may not be affected necessarily on an ongoing basis.
The symptoms may occur, disappear and reappear. That is why we need to adapt to this new reality. And with the help of our research services, I believe that we are going in the right direction. In any case, that is my impression.
[English]
Senator Day: Mr. Minister, let me start by reading a short statement by a sergeant who is still living. I knew him when he served in the Armed Forces in the 1960s and 1970s. He said:
I injured my back . . . while in the Army. At the time, a doctor wrote on my military records that he foresaw that I would have back problems later in life.
The doctor's prophecy came true. He goes on to say:
After back surgery in 1998, during which titanium rods were put in my back, I was in a wheelchair for 3.5 years. After rehabilitation, I now walk with braces on my legs and a 4 wheel roller. I was also exposed to Agent Orange on exercise when I served in Gagetown. I recall the battle order "out poncho" and the smell when the chopper sprayed everything. Fortunately, I wasn't a smoker or drinker and I am still walking around and I remained reasonably fit.
My question is not with respect to his back injury. He seemed to have had good records there, but my point is the Agent Orange. There was an ex gratia program that served a very limited number of Armed Forces personnel. The evidence is clear that Agent Orange was sprayed on soldiers who were in the field between 1956 and 1984. That is documented. Those who were entitled to compensation had to have been living in the period 2006 to 2009, they could not have died from the Agent Orange, or they would not have qualified, and the benefit to their families would not have been available, and it was only for spraying for 1966-67, one year.
This is almost a disgraceful problem that we have not solved. My understanding is that only about $48 million of the $95 million set aside for this was actually spent, but we are now up to over $2 million on a class action law suit paid to lawyers. When will we step in and resolve this problem and deal with it properly?
[Translation]
Mr. Blackburn: You also know that it was our government that took action to respond to those who may have suffered from the use of Agent Orange. You mentioned 1966-1967. Those are the two years when Agent Orange was unregistered. It was realized after that that people had been affected. Given that fact, we decided to provide them with an ex gratia payment of $20,000.
Yes, there are always guidelines. There is always a line somewhere. The deadline to apply for the payment was April 1, 2009. Some people are still sending in applications, and if they have a valid reason, we have no problem with it. Yes, we earmarked $96.5 million. We wanted to have enough to cover all the applications that might come in. Of those we have received, 3 924 have been approved. At this point, $53.9 million has been spent. We have tried to help those who have suffered because of the application of Agent Orange.
My impression is that those who have received the payment appreciate the fact that the government set up this program. However, I can understand that people would always like the deadline changed. As a government, we think that there will never be a perfect solution. Of course, we have tried to help as many people as possible, and we have based our assistance on the two years during which Agent Orange was used.
[English]
Senator Day: My understanding is that the New Veterans Charter will deal with veterans and their families after 1947. For those who were not released for medical reasons and did not have a disability when they retired but developed something later in life, whether a physical or mental health problem, they can apply and be dealt with under the charter. For the families and some of the surviving sufferers from this Agent Orange spraying on soldiers in Canadian Forces Base Gagetown, New Brunswick, is there any reason why the New Veterans Charter cannot apply to their situation?
Ms. Tining: It is no different for a former Canadian Forces member, a veteran, who is experiencing some illnesses or some physical or mental health condition that can be traced back to his service. There is no time limit for this person to bring an application forward.
Senator Day: Have you accepted any claims for physical disabilities developed later by virtue of having been sprayed with Agent Orange?
Ms. Tining: We are talking about disability pension here, and I would need to check the timing of when the last ones were allowed.
Senator Day: I was talking about any of the programs that might fit — disability programs or any of the programs — under the New Veterans Charter.
Ms. Tining: The New Veterans Charter or the Pension Act that applied before the New Veterans Charter had the same provisions. There is no time limitation for a veteran to bring forward an application for an illness or physical or mental health condition related to service.
Senator Day: Have you accepted any?
Ms. Tining: I am sure we have.
Senator Day: Based on Agent Orange?
Ms. Tining: I will have to check on Agent Orange.
Senator Day: Will you let us know, and, if so, how many?
Ms. Tining: Yes.
[Translation]
Mr. Blackburn: Clearly, any military members who believe they have an illness associated with exposure to Agent Orange or any other disability resulting from their service can apply for disability benefits.
[English]
Senator Day: He had to be living at the time the Conservative government took power in April of 2006. If that veteran had been sprayed with Agent Orange and had died before that, his family was not entitled to make any application. That is what these widows are all about.
Ms. Tining: The big difference is a disability pension, which, as the minister said, has no limitation. Be it Agent Orange or something else, there is never any time limitation.
The ex gratia payment, by its nature, is a gift to those who could have been exposed to Agent Orange during these two summers where it was sprayed and who have lived in uncertainty for decades until a government decision allowed them to be compensated through an ex gratia payment. My answer was related to a disability pension.
With the ex gratia payment, as the minister said, the date limit was April of 2009. For any person who has not submitted an application before that time, with those circumstances, we are open — and we have said — to receive these late applications.
Senator Day: As long as he was living after 2006, right?
[Translation]
Mr. Blackburn: It came into effect on September 12, 2007, and applied retroactively to February 6, 2006, the year our government came into office. We made a commitment to respond to those who had suffered. That is why we made good on our commitment. We know that things are never perfect. We did the best we could in the circumstances.
[English]
The Chair: We look forward very much to receiving that information, and we will be pursuing that question.
I will excuse the minister because he has made it clear that he needs to get to other business. However, I hope the deputy minister will accept our invitation to stay and take more questions from members.
Minister, on behalf of all members of the committee, I want to welcome you to your new and very important responsibilities and thank you for being here. I assure you that we will be inviting you back again and hope you will accept our invitation.
[Translation]
Mr. Blackburn: Thank you for those words, Mr. Chairman. A flaw of mine is that I quickly become passionate about my new responsibilities. This is my fifth department, and the portfolio interests me. I ask questions and I look at what we can do to improve things — keeping budgetary constraints in mind — in order to help those in difficulty. If we are in a position to address problems, all the better. That is what I am trying to do.
[English]
The Chair: I will ask Senator Manning to ask a question of the deputy minister.
Senator Manning: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just back to one of Senator Dallaire's questions on Ste. Anne's Hospital. Could you give us the status of where that is at the present time? I realize there is a transfer in the works. Maybe you can highlight for us the status at the present time, please.
Ms. Tining: I am glad to do so. We approached the Province of Quebec last year to determine their interest in transfer discussions. The basis for our approach to the province was the fact that, as you well know, the demographics of our traditional war veterans, sadly to say, is going down. We had a number of empty beds at Ste. Anne's Hospital, and we know, by reading the newspapers, that the West Island of Montreal has a need for long-term care.
Two attempts were made to transfer Ste. Anne's Hospital to the province in previous decades. Both attempts failed, but we thought the stars could be aligned for a transfer of the hospital, with, of course, priority to be given to veterans by the federal government. The fact that the province could operate the airport does not take away the responsibility from the federal government to take care of veterans. We have successfully transferred 17 other hospitals across the country in the last 40 years. Ste. Anne's Hospital is the last remaining federal hospital for veterans.
We have approached the province, and they have confirmed their interest. We appointed a chief negotiator in early January of this year. The first task of the negotiator was to do an environmental scan to find out where the different stakeholders' interests were. The negotiating strategy should be finalized in the next few weeks and will be presented to us. Our target is to officially start detailed negotiations with the province early in the fall.
We are talking with the province as we speak. One of the first interests from their end is to have access to a certain number of long-term-care beds in different programs, for 30 or 45 days, to do assessments. Understanding that the negotiation for the transfer will likely take a number of years, we are working to have an initial admission of civilians during the transfers. We are in discussions with the province to find out what they would need, what the costs would be and to perhaps have this first piece of agreement done as we continue the transfer negotiations.
Senator Manning: With respect to what we seem to be calling the new veterans versus the people from the previous wars, I realize we all hear the numbers and watch the news when a soldier is killed in Afghanistan or wherever; however, we do not hear the statistics on those injured soldiers returning to Canada.
Could you highlight for us a couple of the major concerns the department is experiencing with injured soldiers returning? How do you see the New Veterans Charter addressing those concerns? Do you have a positive tool for addressing that?
Ms. Tining: I will start by giving you a sense of the evolution of the demographics. I will call it the war service, which is World War II and the Korean War, versus the modern-day veterans. From one year to the next, the numbers are going down with respect to our traditional war veterans.
For example, in March of last year, we had close to 75,000 clients who were traditional war veterans; this year, we are at 68,000. There is a line going down. For the modern-day veterans, the line is going up. In March of last year, we had 58,000 modern-day veterans as our clients; this year we have 63,000. The two lines are crossing.
The minister said the New Veterans Charter was a different way of providing the benefits and services. The New Veterans Charter is grounded in wellness. We are attempting to achieve a successful transition to civilian life for the modern-day veterans.
If we go back in history, after the World War II, the types of programs and services the department had available for veterans was much more comprehensive because they were coming back after the war and needed programs to acquire land, education, et cetera. All these programs had been there but were no longer required as the veterans aged. We ended up having basically monthly pensions and health services, the two main elements veterans need as they aged.
For a younger veteran and his or her family, transitioning to civilian life requires more than a monthly pension and health care. That is why the program structure of the New Veterans Charter is focused on rehabilitation. While the person is in rehab, some earnings loss and compensation, a monthly amount, is provided to sustain the family, and other financial supports are available through the charter.
That is the difference between the two groups. The mandate has not changed. We still provide programs and services to veterans, but the needs are drastically different.
As I said before, we are doing an evaluation of the New Veterans Charter, the five programs as well as whether or not the New Veterans Charter is achieving the outcomes that were contemplated in the design. That evaluation will be completed by December of this year. The minister referred to a questionnaire that he has asked us to administer to those who received a disability award. I would hope, since he has said that he is passionate about this issue, that we will have the results of that questionnaire before the summer.
A great deal of conversation has been taking place about huge amounts of money being given to young people are who are not necessarily in a position to make the best decisions. When you look at the distribution of the amounts that have been given — which I could provide to the committee — you will realize that 71 per cent of the awards are lower than $40,000. Only 36 clients have received the maximum of $276,000. Through the questionnaire, as the minister said, we will not only go by what amount of money the client had, but also whether the client was between 25 and 35 years of age. We have the age segregation as well as the money segregation so that we have some structure as to how the money was used. That will be important for the minister — and for all of us, frankly — to have some facts around the conversation circulating that the money is being misused.
Senator Manning: I would like to have that information from the deputy minister.
The Chair: When the information is available, I will ask you, deputy minister, to send it to our clerk.
I will pose a question that I hope you will take as notice. We have learned from your testimony before the other place that the New Veterans Charter has spent $841 million to date. Later, would you please give us, through the clerk, whatever information you can as to a breakdown of where and how that money was spent, in whatever form it now exists within your department? We would be grateful for that information.
[Translation]
Senator Dallaire: I have the case of a student in the reserve unit in Matane. He joined his reserve unit and was deployed, and so he is a soldier. He was wounded and wants to go back to school, but his injuries are causing complications for him.
He can expect to receive a set amount, but he can also expect 75 per cent of his salary, except that he was a soldier. You cannot live on a soldier's salary, especially if you are already married. He receives 75 per cent of his salary, and his full university program is not necessarily guaranteed either. Students account for at least 80 per cent of reserve members, who represent over 20 per cent of all the soldiers deployed. Some of them die or suffer injuries, just like the men and women in the regular army.
How can we limit the benefits provided in this way? Why go back to 75 per cent of the CF salary, rather than setting a standard? In the old 1943 charter, the standard was in fact a soldier's salary. It was increased over the years up to 100 per cent, and those with disabilities received $2,000 per month, depending on whether they had a family or not. Why not set a minimum salary amount that would enable these people to live? If you make that change, will you have to go back to the House of Commons or cabinet, or could you do it with the minister's authority?
Ms. Tining: The programs under the new charter are available to reserve members as well as to those in the regular force. As long as they have served, no distinction is made and they have access to the same programs and services. With respect to the 75 per cent of their CF salary, we had a committee on the New Veterans Charter that spent over 18 months on the results and their recommendations for changes to make with the new charter.
Senator Dallaire: Was that the Westmoreland study?
Ms. Tining: Yes. They completed their study last October and one of their recommendations was that the maximum of 75 per cent of their salary for those in the lowest ranks was not adequate in many areas of the country to enable these individuals to make ends meet and live above the poverty line. So that is one of the improvements recommended to the department.
As for whether this change can be made under the minister's authority, the answer is no. It means changing the charter, and so the recommendation must be presented to cabinet.
Senator Dallaire: What surprised us when we undertook even a brief examination of the charter was that administrative aspects had been inserted that were not there in the draft version. The minister had much more autonomy. I must say that the bureaucracy got its nose into things and increased the authority of Treasury Board while decreasing the minister's ability to address people's needs.
It may take a year and a half to find a solution. If there is an election, heaven knows when it will happen! I find that very unfortunate. But I hope that the minister is pushing as hard as he can, which is not necessarily evident in the communications.
My second point is very specific. With the new residential centre at St. Anne's, there are 9 criteria one has to meet in order to be accepted, but 10 to be rejected. Among the latter are people who are at risk, suicidal or not stabilized. Basically, they are not accepting people who are still in crisis and even those who are barely out of crisis and might need special monitoring.
The reason I am asking is that what you have created is a first step. The research underway now is at an early stage if we compare with what the Americans are doing. Is it your objective to create a much deeper understanding of these injuries in order to reduce their impact and develop a psychiatric clinic involved in research, education and training specific to the military that could be useful to the RCMP, which is slow to get on board and recognize this problem?
Ms. Tining: With respect to increasing research capacity in order to better understand the problems, I can say that the minister is referring to the work being done on life after military service. That research is being carried out jointly with National Defence and will be done by Statistics Canada. We are investing nearly $1 million to learn more about the experience of CF members as they return to civilian life.
Research emphasis in the department has been on the work forums for the past few years. One of the tools for improving our research with other countries, including the United States, is the international ministers' forum, the international officials' forum. At the last meeting at the beginning of this year, we received a commitment from the U.S. Veterans Affairs Department to share much of their research with us in a concrete way. It is not completely adapted to our reality. But when we look at the size and capacity of the American forces and the number of veterans and the understanding of the issues, because of our partnership with them, we can benefit from that, while making our own research a priority.
[English]
The Chair: Time is our enemy. However, I wanted to ask a quick question before we conclude. You said that about 39 members received the full amount of the one-time, lump sum payment.
Ms. Tining: It was 36 members.
The Chair: I am presuming that the families of the 142 members who have been killed have also received the maximum amount. Am I correct?
Ms. Tining: This is the amount that Veterans Affairs has given. National Defence, of course, will provide some amounts of money. For many of them, if not all of them, they have insurance.
The Chair: Would that be a comparable amount?
Ms. Tining: Yes. The insurance will go to the family. The disability award is not given to the family; it is given to the spouse of the children.
The Chair: We will ask you back again, as well as the minister.
(The committee adjourned.) |
