THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS
OF THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE
ON NATIONAL SECURITY AND DEFENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, October 6, 2010
The Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence met this day at 12 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).
[English]
Kevin Pittman, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, as clerk of your committee it is my duty to preside over the election of the chair.
[Translation]
I am ready to receive motions to that effect.
Senator Pépin: I nominate Senator Dallaire for chair.
[English]
Mr. Pittman: Are there any other nominations?
It is moved by the Honourable Senator Pépin that the Honourable Senator Dallaire do take the chair of this committee.
[Translation]
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt this motion?
Some hon. senators: Yes.
[English]
Mr. Pittman: I declare the motion carried.
[Translation]
I invite Honourable Senator Dallaire to take the chair.
Senator Roméo Antonius Dallaire (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: The applause was not effusive, so I am not sure if I am being set up.
[Translation]
Thank you for the vote of confidence in electing me chair of the committee by acclamation.
[English]
I would like to start by requesting a motion of thanks to my predecessor, Senator Banks, who has left me with a few notes of his own from his time as chair of this committee and who has now moved on to other committees.
I would like to request that we thank him for his leadership; for the long-standing interest he has had in this committee, even when he was not a member; and for his concerns for veterans, particularly coming from a very well-known garrison city, Edmonton. It has a significant serving garrison and also many new-generation veterans with whom he has personally been in touch.
Senator Day: Unanimous.
The Chair: Thank you. Thank you very much, Senator Banks, for the great leadership you provided us in the past.
If I may, we have a few administrative elements before we get to the heart of the subject of today, which is some of the amendments to the New Veterans Charter being proposed by the government, as well as changes to processes and procedures.
I would like to propose the following, due to time constraints: Our caucus finishes at noon, with the leader generally being the last speaker, and we have lunch here for senators. As you know, we finish by 1:20 p.m. so that we can be in the chamber. That does not give us much time to have lunch. To stop the stress, panic and half starts that we have had on occasion, I would like to propose that even though it eats away at our time, it will be more effective if we take the time to grab a bit of energy and then sit down to commence at 12:15 p.m. and run to 1:30 p.m.
In that time frame, we can maximize our time versus having people come in and out and missing opportunities, particularly when we have witnesses who give us an initial presentation. If you miss that, you miss the initial effort by the witness to let us know where they are coming from. I put that before you, colleagues.
Senator Downe: I understand fully the chair's concern about the time constraints, but I disagree. This committee, unlike other Senate committees, only meets once a week because it is a subcommittee. We had a reduction of the time from 1:30 p.m. to 1:20 p.m. a few weeks ago. The proposal today would take away another 15 minutes. That is 25 minutes less a week for a committee that only meets once a week.
I think people can either slip out of caucus early or eat after the meeting and be a few minutes late arriving in the chamber. Veterans and their families have many issues and concerns, and this committee meeting more rather than less is the way to go.
Senator Plett: I want to largely echo Senator Downe's comments. I was in here at 11:45 a.m. today, and I had my sandwich. Senator Downe was in here almost right after that, and we were the only two people here at 12 o'clock. If we postpone this to 12:15 p.m. and people show up at 12:20 p.m., we are continually shortening our time.
I suggest strongly that we stick with 1:20 p.m. If people then choose to be a few minutes late in the chamber, that is their choice and those of us who want to be there on time can do so.
In many of our committees, we have a sandwich while we are having a meeting. Maybe we can dispense with the soup as it might be a little messy, but certainly we could eat the fruit and sandwiches here after our meeting has started. Either way, I would strongly encourage us to start the meetings promptly at 12 o'clock.
Senator Day: Just to comment on Senator Plett's last comment, when we are televised and have witnesses, we decided that it would not look good if we had food in front of us on the table.
Senator Plett: I will be here then at 11:45 a.m. for my sandwich.
Senator Pépin: I agree that we should arrive a little earlier, 11:45 a.m., for example, or we eat after.
The Chair: I am personally glad that you voted that down. I felt I was responsible for the morale of the troops, that, first, you do have the opportunity to ensure that you do take maximum time with your leader in caucus and, second, that you do have some food. I agree that the food will still be there afterwards, and we can grab a bite.
We will continue with the plan that we had before. We will start promptly at noon and look forward, because we are a small subcommittee, to doing our best to be here on time to be able to hear the witnesses, particularly their opening statements.
Are there any other immediate administrative requirements from the floor? If not, my last comment before getting into the agenda is the fact that we will have a communications extract published about the change of chair in the committee. The draft will be presented to Senator Manning, who is the deputy chair, later this afternoon. If he agrees with it, then it will be a go. I hope it will be suitable; it is supposed to be ready for that. Is that agreeable? Very good.
[Translation]
I would like to invite our two witnesses to make their presentations to the committee. Ms. Williamson is the Director of Strategic Policy, Policy, Programs and Partnerships, with Veterans Affairs Canada. She is involved in tabling and drafting the department’s policies. Mr. Lalonde is the Director of Strategic Policy, Policy, Programs and Partnerships, with the same department. You could explain to us how you share the tasks involved and tell us where in the chain of command you fall.
Sandra Williamson, Director, Strategic Policy, Policy, Programs and Partnerships, Veterans Affairs Canada: Mr. Chair, I will begin, and then Mr. Lalonde will take over.
[English]
As the chair has indicated, I am Sandra Williamson, Director, Strategic Policy, Policy, Programs and Partnerships, with Veterans Affairs Canada in Charlottetown. I report to Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Brian Ferguson. He is responsible for the policy, programs and partnership branch of the department. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today about the programs, services and benefits that Veterans Affairs Canada offers to Canadian Forces, CF, members and veterans who sustain serious injuries and become permanently disabled while serving in the military.
I understand that you have the news release and the backgrounders that were used for recent announcements by my minister and Minister MacKay on September 19 and 28. As I indicated, I will speak, and my colleague Mr. Raymond Lalonde will outline the broad array of programs and services available under the New Veterans Charter. After that, I will speak more specifically to the specific enhancements and improvements in financial support that were announced for severely injured veterans by Minister Blackburn.
I will turn it over to Mr. Lalonde to make a few comments about the New Veterans Charter programs generally; then I will provide more details.
[Translation]
Raymond Lalonde, Director, Strategic Policy, Policy, Programs and Partnerships, Veterans Affairs Canada: Mr. Chair, I am the Director of the National Centre for Operational Stress Injuries, Veterans Affairs Department.
[English]
I am the director of the National Centre for Operational Stress Injuries. I am here today with Ms. Williamson because I have been involved since the beginning with the development of the New Veterans Charter and continue to work with head office staff on this. I report to Ms. Gravelle at Ste. Anne’s Hospital, where we met not long ago.
I will give a bit of publicity for a conference to be held in Montreal, November 4 to 6, where we have the pleasure to have a renowned guest speaker, Senator Dallaire. The International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies is a well-renowned international organization that holds yearly conferences. This year it is in Montreal, and Veterans Affairs Canada is partnering with the society for that conference. Key researchers and top researchers in traumatic stress studies from around the world will attend. The conference has a veteran and military track this year. That is why we are partnering with that organization.
[Translation]
I do not want to take up too much time with talking about the new charter and its various components, since our main focus today will be on the recently announced changes. It is of interest to see how these new provisions fit within the overall framework of the new charter.
The new charter’s programs and services are the key means through which we provide assistance to the new clients: young Canadian Forces veterans. All of those programs and services are supported through case management. This week, announcements were made that some new resources would be added. We will talk about that later on.
The goal of case management is to set objectives with clients and their family. The goal entails devising an action plan, coordinating service delivery with external providers, be it in the public or private sector, and with internal organizations. It also entails ensuring a smooth transition from being active soldiers to being veterans. In short, the overall objective is to provide veterans with the ability to function as best they can and ensure their welfare.
As for the rehabilitation program, it is important to note that it is not intended only for those with injuries related to military operations. Any member of the military who leaves the Forces for medical reasons, be they related to military service or not — for instance, cancer — has access to rehabilitation services. There could be medical, psychosocial or professional problems involved. Therefore, individuals do not have to be receiving disability benefits approved by the department to have access to the rehabilitation program, which provides assessments, counselling, treatment, medication, career counselling, education assistance and daycare assistance while participants attend class.
A range of services are available to our clients, who have access to them when they leave the Canadian Forces or at any time after that, if a rehabilitation need was not met. The services are accessible to our clients even in five or ten years’ time.
I am talking about all the financial benefits — I will not get into too much detail because this will be discussed in-depth this morning — access to group insurance, which they can benefit from if they are not eligible for the Public Service Health Care Plan. There are also many services offered to veterans that are available to their families. For instance, when soldiers die or are unable to benefit from the rehabilitation program, the services can be extended to their families.
Families also have access to a 24/7 hotline, like an EAP, at all times. In addition, they can benefit from peer helper support, provided by family members of those who suffered operational stress injuries. There are also allowances for survivors and education assistance.
So, we are talking about a number of programs that reflect the new measures and that will further benefit veterans.
[English]
Ms. Williamson: I will take a few minutes to explain the improvements that were announced recently, and I would like to emphasize that more announcements are forthcoming. The last two announcements were intended to be the first in a series of measures that will demonstrate the department's and the government's commitment to veterans.
In terms of new improvements, first, access to an existing program under the New Veterans Charter is being expanded to allow more veterans to qualify.
As part of the New Veterans Charter, the Permanent Impairment Allowance program was created to provide monthly support to veterans with disabilities that result in severe and permanent impairments. The Permanent Impairment Allowance was specifically designed to recognize that where a permanent and severe impairment exists, individuals experience both diminished employment opportunities and career advancement opportunities, and hence they are negatively affected.
The payment of the Permanent Impairment Allowance, PIA, is indexed annually. For the purposes of this allowance, it is important for the committee to understand that the conditions include the following but are not necessarily limited to them: amputations; the loss of a limb or the use of a limb; permanent loss of vision, hearing, or speech; severe and permanent psychiatric conditions; multiple physical conditions; or a combination of physical and mental health conditions.
Today, only 16 veterans receive a Permanent Impairment Allowance. That was recognized as a problem, and, therefore, as announced on September 19, the eligibility criteria for that program will be adjusted to allow for approximately 3,500 more veterans over the next five years to receive monthly financial support. That support ranges from approximately $500 to $1600 per month, depending on the severity of the impairment.
As a second improvement, an additional $1,000 per month will be paid to veterans who are receiving the Permanent Impairment Allowance and, due to the severity of their condition, cannot work to their full potential.
We know that many individuals who have serious injuries and disabilities can, with rehabilitation and other supports, continue to work. However, some cannot, and it is estimated that approximately 500 of the 3,500 individuals who will gain access to this program will qualify for the additional $1,000 per month.
Third, to ensure that veterans participating in rehabilitation have enough monthly income for normal living expenses, changes are being proposed to the Earnings Loss Benefit, which is an income replacement support. The new minimum pre-tax Earnings Loss Benefit will be set at approximately $40,000 per year.
That change will result in increased income support for approximately 2,300 veterans over the next five years, particularly for those who released from the lower ranks or those who released many years ago when military salaries were much lower.
For those who cannot return to suitable gainful employment, this benefit continues to the age of 65 years, and this change will apply to all regular and full-time reserve force members. Overall, as a package, approximately 4,000 veterans are expected to benefit from these changes over the next five years. Some veterans will receive the benefit of all three enhancements.
The legislation that is needed to allow the changes to these benefits to become available to severely disabled individuals is expected to be tabled by the minister later this month and will follow the normal legislative process.
In addition, a number of regulatory changes are required, and the regulations governing the existing benefits, such as the Earnings Loss Benefit and the Permanent Impairment Allowance, need to be amended for the improvements to move forward. The regulatory work is expected to follow the legislation so that new benefits can come into place as soon as possible in 2011.
As a final comment, I would like to explain that while these benefits take effect on the coming-into-force date of the regulations, CF veterans will be eligible regardless of when their injury occurred. For example, many CF veterans who currently do not qualify for the Permanent Impairment Allowance under the criteria established when the New Veterans Charter came into force in 2006 will benefit when the new eligibility requirements are implemented in 2011. For example, if an injury occurred in 2001 and the CF veteran has participated in rehabilitation and is now working but still has a permanent and severe impairment, that individual will be eligible for the Permanent Impairment Allowance. If that same individual is not able to work, despite having participated in rehabilitation, for example, he or she will be eligible for the additional $1,000 supplement on top of their monthly Permanent Impairment Allowance.
As another example, veterans who are receiving the Earnings Loss Benefit when the new minimum monthly amount comes into force will benefit from the increase. Their earnings loss payments will be adjusted to the higher amount.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would be happy to answer questions that members may have.
The Chair: The deputy chair, Senator Manning, usually has the first opportunity to ask questions, but he has left the room, so we will move to Senator Downe, followed by Senator Plett.
Senator Downe: Is the $1,000 monthly payment you referred to taxable?
Ms. Williamson: Yes; it is part of the economic benefit that is intended to recognize the loss of employment opportunity and career advancement opportunity that individuals with disabilities will experience.
Senator Downe: What is the actual payment that they will receive? If $40,000 is the only income, what is the payment to them?
Ms. Williamson: The Permanent Impairment Allowance pays at three different grade levels, depending on the severity of the impairment. Therefore, an individual may receive $536 if they are able to work. If that same individual is not able to work, he or she would receive the additional $1,000, bringing the monthly support to approximately $1,500 per month.
Another individual who has a severe impairment at a grade-one level — for example, a double amputation — and is still able to work would receive $1,600 as part of the regular monthly Permanent Impairment Allowance. If that person could not work, he or she would receive the additional $1,000, bringing their monthly Permanent Impairment Allowance to $2,600 per month.
In addition, if individuals cannot work, their Earnings Loss Benefit would be 75 per cent of their pre-release salary, or we have established a new minimum floor of $40,000 per year. It is important that people understand that it is 75 per cent of an individual's pre-release salary, but the minimum would be $40,000 before tax.
Senator Downe: Is that $40,000 taxable as well?
Ms. Williamson: That is correct. That is income replacement, income support.
Senator Downe: The veterans I have heard from, and I am sure the chair has heard from many as well, are delighted that the pressure the veterans ombudsman has put on the government has forced this action. They have concerns, however, about the dollar figures. They have had concerns for the last number of years with the previous Liberal government as well over the announcement of the amounts that will actually be coming to veterans and then the reality years later that the figures are actually much smaller than the government announced. For example, Agent Orange was announced at $96 million, and it was nowhere near that amount. We will have to keep a close eye, as a committee, on how much of this money ends up in the pockets of veterans and their families.
The Chair: Senator Downe, you have made an extrapolation on why these initiatives have come at this time, and that is your perspective. They probably have another reason, and I am sure there have been many other efforts. Thank you for that comment.
We have been at this for a while, and the responsiveness of why we are here is because we want to gain more insight into this rather rapid response and to what extent you have been able to articulate the details thereof. We comprehend the full parameters of what these new demands are, including whether this is also new money coming into the department or these monies are being readjusted because we saw in the last budget that you had a reduction in budget.
Are all these monies new, additional monies to your baseline funding in Veterans Affairs Canada?
Ms. Williamson: Yes. These improvements are estimated to cost $200 million over the next five years, so $200 million has been added to the department's budget. I should point out that that money will go into the pockets of veterans. No administrative costs for the department are included within that $200-million figure.
Senator Plett: Thank you for your marvellous presentation. You told us about a number of exciting initiatives, and I have three questions, if I could.
An important part of the New Veterans Charter is the provision of psycho-social rehabilitative services. Our government — and, I might add, without the help of the ombudsman — has taken the positive step of opening five new state-of-the-art operational stress injury clinics, bringing the total to ten.
Could you tell us what the impact of these new facilities is on the ability for veterans who have suffered operational stress injuries to receive the treatment they need?
Mr. Lalonde: The decision from the government to fund five new operational stress injury clinics, or OSI clinics, was taken in 2007. We announced the opening of the last one a few months ago, so all of these clinics are open. That means that as part of the case plan, when veterans need a psychological evaluation assessment to determine what their needs are and what their mental health situation is, they have access to clinics where we have experts with high levels of expertise, such as psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers and nurses, working in a team to provide this comprehensive assessment and also to offer the evidence and form practices to treat veterans. They have access to these clinics across the country.
As you know, as it is probably the same in all provinces, in Quebec, it takes at least a year or a year and a half to find a psychiatrist, whereas we have these resources available in our clinics. We currently have 116 health professionals in our OSI clinics across the country, which is a major improvement from a few years ago.
These services are readily available. The experts are all working with the provincial health system to improve their relationship with other required health services. For example, veterans may require pain management or other hospitalization, so they work with all community services in their regions.
The impact of these clinics is not only the number of veterans for whom we are able to provide services but also the increased knowledge in the community that these clinics bring on operational stress injuries, understanding what it is and providing psycho-education to families. It has been a real benefit for our veterans and their families.
Currently, I can tell you that the number of family members being treated in our clinics is increasing steadily; at last count, we had over 135. We have over 1,400 veterans in our clinics, and it is growing steadily. We have had an increase of almost 20 per cent in the number of people being treated at our clinics in the last six months, which is a big improvement.
Senator Plett: Are the veterans saying that they are happy with the improvement?
Mr. Lalonde: Actually, we surveyed our clients, and the rate of satisfaction is very high in our OSI clinics. Over 95 per cent would recommend the clinic to someone else who has an operational stress injury.
Senator Plett: Post-traumatic stress disorder and other operational stress injuries take a devastating toll on veterans, and they can obviously also be harmful to families. Do you have any insight into how we can further improve conditions for the families of these veterans who are suffering with this?
Mr. Lalonde: We have done a review in the department of services to families, which led to a clarification of our policies on what services can be provided. That is why the number of family members that we see being treated in our psych clinics is increasing all the time.
The other measure that the department took a few years ago is to have family peer support coordinators, of which we have eight. They have been assigned to work with families who have lived through the same experience that they have. They help build a network of peer support with family members, which is very helpful.
The knowledge for family members of our veteran assistance services is not well used. It is a privacy impact assessment-type service, so it is a 24-7, 1-800 number that families can access, not only the veterans but the family members. It could be a problem with a teenager, financial situation, health or mental health. These services are free and easily available just by calling the 1-800 number, and it is not well used. Communication is very important, communication with family members on what is an OSI, how to see that your spouse may have an OSI and where to seek treatment. We need to get the psycho-education and information out because the services and programs are there to help the family members. It is a matter of ensuring that they know about them and where to access the services.
Senator Plett: Many veterans and other stakeholders feel that all that is offered to them — and we have heard this repeatedly — in their retirement is essentially a disability award. However, you have clearly shown us in your presentation that a whole range of programs is available to assist in reintegrating veterans into civil society.
How easy is it for veterans to access rehabilitative services? What are the barriers, and what is it like in comparison to the pension act regime?
Mr. Lalonde: One thing we wanted to do when we developed the New Veterans Charter was to create easy access to the services. Prior to the New Veterans Charter, a CF veteran had to get entitlement to a disability pension. Therefore, the only gateway for services was to get a disability pension, and the disability pension process is long with many limits to what we can offer. With the New Veterans Charter, we wanted to be able to provide the rehabilitation services without having to go through a disability pension or application or disability award. Veterans are entitled to the rehab services even though they have not yet been approved for a disability award, so this is the major change.
The level of decision makes it easier to get people in. The percentage of people submitting a rehab application has a very high approval rate. The decision level is made in the district office, not at the adjudicator bureau in Charlottetown, so it is front-line staff, case managers who do make decisions on who is entitled or not, and the approval level is very high.
That is basically what we have done to ensure easier access rather than the highly legalistic approach tha we had.
Ms. Williamson: To add to that, part of the new announcement is about increasing access to a program that was designed and implemented as part of the New Veterans Charter. However, experience shows that with only 16 people being able to access that program, a difficulty obviously exists. Therefore, the eligibility criteria for the Permanent Impairment Allowance are being adjusted to ensure more people can access that. We know that approximately 61,000 Canadian Forces veterans right now are either receiving a disability pension, a disability award or a combination of both. Currently, for the Permanent Impairment Allowance part, the requirement is that you must be in receipt of a disability award, so the eligibility criteria that will be changed as part of the legislation will also address access to the New Veterans Charter program.
The Chair: Thank you for the clarification.
Senator Plett: Keep up the good work. Thank you very much.
Senator Manning: Thank you for your presentation. I was listening in the room next door.
I am sure you read some of the testimony that we have received here. We have heard concerns at times. Hopefully these new measures will address these concerns, and I truly believe they will because some of the concerns that have been raised have been addressed already. Some veterans expressed a level of frustration, especially those who came back from Afghanistan recently, in relation to dealing with their case managers and the process of how they reach a point where they can avail themselves of some of the programs that would be accessible to them.
Can you explain the process to the committee? If a veteran returns from Afghanistan tomorrow with a severe injury, what is the process? It seemed as though they were not totally aware of the process. I am not here to blame or find fault; I am here to try to find an answer so that we can address those concerns. Could you give us some idea of the process from your perspective so that we can look back on their testimony to see if we can find some middle ground?
Ms. Williamson: I understand issues exist around service improvements and delivery and operations, and steps are being taken within the department clearly to address some very legitimate concerns. I understand that on October 20, our colleagues from the service delivery branch will be here to speak specifically to that issue, and I suggest that they might be better placed to provide a fuller explanation around the question of process.
Senator Manning: That is fine. I appreciate that.
An injured soldier that returns to Canada is not the only victim of the injury. It extends to family members many times and causes major upheaval. We have heard testimony from people with young children who are trying to readjust their lives. What about the services available to the family of the veteran? We have heard testimony at times about the spouse becoming the caregiver and not necessarily having the proper training to do so. We have situations where children find it difficult to deal with their parent who is severely injured.
Again, could you clarify so that as we look back at the testimony we have already heard, we understand what is available to the family members of the veteran?
Mr. Lalonde: When talking about services to families of veterans, we are talking about former members of the Canadian Forces. Therefore, when they come back from Afghanistan with an injury, all the services, the health care, will be provided by National Defence, DND. It will take normally a few years before the responsibility for these families is transferred to Veterans Affairs Canada. A transition takes place between the two departments maybe two or three years down the road where we are involved with the National Defence in integrated personnel support units. That is where we start working with the members, their families and the DND case manager to ensure that we have a good comprehension of the needs of these members who will be released in the next six months, for example, so that we can start providing information on the programs and services Veterans Affairs Canada offers to the veterans and their families.
As far as it goes, for the initial contact that we have with the veterans, we always invite the family members to ensure that we have a comprehensive understanding of the family needs. As I said earlier, one objective of our case management process is to ensure that we establish the objectives of the veterans and their families and the barriers. As you indicated, the impact of the injury is felt not only by the veterans themselves but by the whole family. We need to ensure that we have a good understanding of the family barriers to attaining goals, maximizing autonomy and also the well-being of the member and the family.
We involve the family through the Veterans Affairs Canada, VAC, Assistance Service. We offer psycho-education information to family members. We can provide treatment when the condition of the member impacts the family. For example, because operational stress injury, OSI, and post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD, affect the family members, the whole family needs to be involved in the treatment. If we treat only the veterans and do not consider the spouse or the children, the treatment will not be effective and we will not achieve the goals for the whole family. Therefore, we provide treatment services to family members when it is related to the condition of the veterans, which is a great improvement from what we had a few years ago.
Educational help can be provided, as I mentioned. If a veteran is not able to avail him or herself of the rehabilitation service, it can be provided to the spouse; or if the member dies in service, these educational and vocational rehabilitation services can be provided to the spouse.
Senator Manning: Can you give an indication of what the minimum $40,000 payment is based on and where that figure originated?
Ms. Williamson: An analysis of other labour market measures and Statistics Canada information was taken into account in establishing that floor. The current floor is approximately $35,000. This reflects an adjustment of approximately $5,000 per year and was looked at within the context of other supports available to individuals to provide monthly support for them.
Senator Manning: Is that based on a salary in the Canadian Armed Forces currently?
Ms. Williamson: The $40,000 reflects approximately 75 per cent of a basic corporal's salary.
Senator Manning: With respect to the services offered by DND and VAC, I know you work closely together to deliver the programs. Perhaps you could take a moment to explain the difference in what services are available because we seem to have had some conflicting testimony. Maybe you could zero in on a couple of the programs that would be available from one department versus the other. Is there a difference? When you talk to an injured soldier, is the package available in one department, or does he or she have to go through different routes?
Ms. Williamson: Currently, the primary health care services are provided by the Canadian Forces to members while they are still serving, so all their health care needs would be taken into account. Other types of supports are currently available, for example, the mobility assistance program, which helps with home adaptations and other types of assistance individuals may require in the home to help with independent living within their situation.
A program within the department called the Veterans Independence Program, VIP, was established to provide the home care supports and services needed to support individuals in their homes. Increasingly, the department is working closely with DND and our Canadian Forces colleagues to ensure a continuity of care so that as individuals transition from the responsibility of DND and become clients of VAC, support is provided continuously.
As Mr. Lalonde mentioned, through the work we are doing collaboratively with our integrated personnel support units and having our case managers work closely with DND case managers in the upfront planning for the types of support services and programs that an injured Canadian Forces member needs, we move forward to the full extent possible in tandem so that upfront planning takes place and we are prepared to assume responsibility and provide the benefits and services needed for that individual.
Senator Manning: The recent announcement addressed some of the concerns that have been brought to our table here over the past several months, and I look forward to the additional announcements that will be forthcoming to address some of the other concerns. We will never reach a time when all concerns are addressed, but we are heading in the right direction.
The Chair: It is interesting that the Legacy of Care package is bringing VAC closer to what DND is doing in a number of areas. Exchanges through these new joint offices have also brought forward these programs. Therefore, it creates less of the trauma that we have seen where CF members have been fearful of falling under the hands of VAC because they felt that they were better treated at DND. These exchanges seem to meet that concern.
[Translation]
Senator Pépin: Shelter will be provided in transition homes, and support services will be offered to the members of the Canadian Armed Forces undergoing rehabilitation. These services will be provided in locations very close to selected rehabilitation sites. How many rehabilitating Canadian Armed Forces members will take advantage of these facilities? Will similar facilities be provided for veteran rehabilitation elsewhere in Canada?
Mr. Lalonde: It is hard for us to answer your first question, since we are talking about the National Defence Department’s programs designed for soldiers. Owing to that fact, we are not necessarily responsible for implementing the programs.
Senator Pépin: Even when soldiers return from deployment?
Mr. Lalonde: If they return from Afghanistan injured, they remain with the Canadian Armed Forces. They can remain with the Canadian Armed Forces for several years. That department is responsible for providing rehabilitation services for a number of years until a patient’s release.
Basically, the Canadian Armed Forces have invested a lot of effort into improving their health care services, especially with regard to mental health. They have doubled the resources available. Their objective is to help soldiers recover in order to continue serving in the Canadian Armed Forces. If the soldiers are unable to do that, the department sees to it that they acquire skills enabling them to practice another profession within the military. If not, a release process is set in motion. The process takes several years before the decision is made to release an individual. It can take up to three years. During that time, immediate care is provided by the Canadian Armed Forces to people like amputees, for instance.
Our programs take effect once individuals have been released, several years later. Usually, physical rehabilitation has already been taking place for a number of years at that point. Once the individuals have been released, services are still provided as before, but Veterans Affairs Canada becomes responsible for funding them.
Senator Pépin: Most veterans are men, but there is still a small number of women among them. Are there any female-oriented services available, since women perhaps have needs that differ from those of their male colleagues?
Mr. Lalonde: Obviously, our health care policies and our programs are the same for everyone. However, when limits for civilian rehabilitation are being set, female-oriented needs may be considered. When devising the rehabilitation plan, case managers decide what the best resources are for offering services specific to female veterans. So those services could be offered at that point. Basically, the rehabilitation program aims to eliminate any restrictions on rehabilitation, regardless of what those restrictions are. It addresses a specific need. That is what we within the department are trying to accomplish with the new charter. The idea is to meet the specific needs of veterans by providing personalized programs and services.
[English]
The Chair: National Defence has 10 clinics for operational stress. You now have 10 set up. That has been the case for a couple of years in Veterans Affairs Canada. The forces set up seven rehabilitation centres. With the joint establishment of this support, is it now organized so that when a person is moving from DND to VAC the caregivers remain the same, or is that still another traumatic experience of having to shift gears to different caregivers?
Mr. Lalonde: First, the seven centres that DND is setting up, they are not for operational stress; they are for physical rehabilitation. They are provincial rehab centres. Across the country, DND currently has five Operational Trauma and Stress Support Centres, OTSSCs; and VAC has 10 OSI clinics. Most of the time, these are stand-alone clinics — that is, there is either a VAC OSI clinic or a DND OTSSC. We only have both in Quebec, Ottawa and Edmonton. In those areas, there is a transition from the CF clinic to the OSI clinic. Sometime before the member is released, discussions take place. It is a matter of ensuring that it does not affect the treatment of the individual. In other areas, there is only one clinic. For example, in Winnipeg, members are seen at VAC OSI clinics. When they are released, it is still the VAC-funded OSI clinics. It depends on the location.
The Chair: We needed that clarification. Thank you.
Senator Meighen: Is the $1,000 additional payment for catastrophic injuries payable for life?
Ms. Williamson: Yes it is.
Senator Meighen: Is it taxable?
Ms. Williamson: Yes, and it is indexed as well. It is $1,000 now. Similarly, the Permanent Impairment Allowance, which currently is $536, $1,072 or $1,609, is also indexed annually.
Senator Meighen: How long does that run?
Ms. Williamson: The Permanent Impairment Allowance is an allowance that is paid for life as well.
Senator Meighen: Does the Earnings Loss Benefit cease at age 65?
Ms. Williamson: That is correct; it ceases at age 65. It is income replacement. After age 65 — and this relates to the increase in the Earnings Loss Benefit — there will be a consequential benefit. The Supplementary Retirement Benefit, which is another benefit under the New Veterans Charter, is based on the gross earnings loss amount payable. As we increase the minimum payable, the Supplementary Retirement Benefit will be increased accordingly.
Senator Meighen: Someone will benefit from all of these, is that correct? That is, they will receive the $1,000 additional payment for life, the Permanent Impairment Allowance for life and the Supplementary Retirement Benefit, which will replace the Earnings Loss Benefit at age 65. What amount are we talking about, roughly? Will it be in the same range?
Mr. Lalonde: To clarify, the Supplementary Retirement Benefit is a lump-sum payment that is given at age 65, which accounts for 2 per cent of the gross Earnings Loss Benefit that the veteran received since the beginning. It could be for 20 years. It is given to make up for the loss of opportunity to contribute to a retirement plan.
After age 65, however, the Canadian Forces Income Support is also available. It is a tax-free benefit for those who are able to work but have not been able to find a job or have low-paying jobs.
Senator Meighen: What about the Canada Pension Plan or the Quebec Pension Plan?
Mr. Lalonde: It depends on the contribution that was made.
Senator Meighen: If the person has not worked, presumably there would be no benefits under those programs.
Mr. Lalonde: That is why we have the Supplementary Retirement Benefit.
Senator Meighen: If they have worked, then it does not disqualify them from the supplementary benefit, does it?
Mr. Lalonde: Not at all.
Ms. Williamson: When we are talking about the different benefits available, I want to make sure that you understand that the $1,000 supplement is only for people who are unable to work to their full capacity. That benefit is targeted to those who are most severely injured and who are not able to have gainful employment, whereas the Permanent Impairment Allowance, the regular monthly allowance, is available to individuals whether or not they are able to work.
For the amounts of financial support, an individual who is at the lowest level of a Permanent Impairment Allowance and is unable to work, the Earnings Loss Benefit would be approximately $58,000 per year, pre-tax. At the middle level, it is approximately $65,000 a year, pre-tax. For those with the most serious injuries and impairments, it is approximately $71,000, pre-tax.
Senator Meighen: At first blush, it is not the easiest thing in the world to grasp. I empathize with the veterans who are having trouble wading through without the assistance of a competent case officer.
When you talked about the additional $1,000, you used said that it is for people who are "unable to work to their full capacity." I thought it was for someone who could not work at all.
Ms. Williamson: Some individuals will be able to do some types of jobs. However, clearly it will not earn them the type of living that they had previously.
Senator Meighen: Maybe they could babysit or do call-centre work.
Are any of these new programs retroactive? I am thinking of the Earnings Loss Benefit. This committee was concerned with the fact that you fixed the payment at 75 per cent of the pre-release salary. Who knows whether the private would have become Chief of the Defence Staff. You have increased the amount by $5,000, but had they not been injured for another four years, they would have been at that probably, or less. What about the people who have been released under the previous criteria? Will they benefit from any retroactivity?
Ms. Williamson: With the Earnings Loss Benefit, happily, there are individuals who have gone through rehabilitation, have received their Earnings Loss Benefit while they were in rehabilitation, which was based on 75 per cent of their salary, and have successfully been rehabilitated. They have found a job and transitioned back into the workplace, so they are no longer in need of the income support. For individuals who are still receiving the Earnings Loss Benefit, when the new changes come into force, their benefits will be adjusted on a go-forward basis.
The Chair: For Senator Day — and we have a supplemental question — we are at this again in a couple of weeks. I am not sure if you two are coming back, but we could use a couple of examples to walk us through this the next time.
You said that retroactivity to 2001 applies for review of cases, but there is no retroactivity of the benefits; that is, the $1,000 is not retroactive to years before. It starts when the legislation is passed. Is that correct?
Ms. Williamson: That is correct.
Senator Day: Mr. Chair, I am pleased you asked because I could never have posed the question as succinctly as you have done.
The Chair: Your time is running.
Senator Day: Yes, and so is the time of veterans who are injured. We owe a great deal of time to our veterans to ensure that the programs we are setting up are not nearly as complicated as they sounded to me from your explanation today. I hope that as time goes on, we can simplify the approach. Injured veterans before this committee have made the point that with so many rules and so many avenues, it is extremely difficult to determine what they are eligible for. It was very easy before when it was simply determined that they had a disability pension based on the level of disability, and then you could go back and change the percentage. It was based on 100 per cent, so it was easy.
Some veterans who appeared here said that they would much rather have the lifetime pension than the lump-sum payment. Ms. Williamson, you said that retroactivity would go back to 2001 for review, but none of these programs existed until 2006.
Ms. Williamson: If I may clarify, regardless of when an individual is injured, he or she can come forward for benefits at any time. In my opening remarks, I used the example of someone who was injured in 2001 not being eligible for some of our benefits under the current regime but would be eligible to apply when the changes come into force. There is no time limit for when an injury had to have occurred to be eligible for the new benefits.
Senator Day: We were led to believe that some of these benefits were available to injured veterans before 2006. Are you saying that it is made available to a greater number of veterans or that more programs are made available to the veterans who are on a disability pension?
Ms. Williamson: We are making changes to the Permanent Impairment Allowance, which is a monthly payment that was established when the New Veterans Charter came into place. Only 16 people are currently benefiting from that allowance.
Senator Day: They are veterans from 2006 forward.
Ms. Williamson: When we make the changes, individuals who may have been injured in 2001 or in 1999 will be eligible for that benefit as well. The changes will take into account disability benefits that are payable as a disability award or a disability pension, so it will not be only for individuals who are injured from 2006 forward.
Senator Day: Do you anticipate that following the passage of this legislation by the House of Commons and the Senate and being declared into law, veterans who are on a disability pension will become eligible for the Permanent Impairment Allowance?
Ms. Williamson: Criteria will be required similar to those required today, but the intention is to look at the broader scope of individuals who are in receipt of benefits under Veterans Affairs Canada. As I said, approximately 61,000 people have either a pension or an award or a combination of the two benefits under different systems. Currently, the Permanent Impairment Allowance is payable only to those with a disability award.
Senator Day: I understand. I will not dwell on that, but I will go back to it when we have more information on this.
In his first announcement, the minister explained that if passed by Parliament, these measures are expected to amount to $2 billion over the life of the program. What is the life of the program?
Ms. Williamson: The figure of $2 billion is an accrual accounting number. This program does not end; there is no end date in sight for this specific program. I use the figure of $200 million over five years, which is the cash cost of the program over the first five years.
Senator Day: You are using the same words as the minister. He went on to say that over the next five years, the benefits represent an additional $200 million. This brings me back to my first question: The first part of his statement was $2 billion over the life of the program. What is the life of the program?
Ms. Williamson: Mr. Chair, I cannot explain the accrual accounting methodology of the Government of Canada. However, veterans’ benefits are calculated on a cash basis and on an accrual accounting basis. I can assure this committee that there is no end date in sight for this program. It simply comes down to the way of Government of Canada accounts.
Senator Day: Could you write to the committee with an explanation of that and perhaps get the help of an accountant in your office? It would be most helpful to the committee.
Senator Plett: None of us will be around at the end of that program.
Senator Day: I understand accrual accounting, but I do not understand how the statement "the life of the program" does not mean that the program ends.
The Chair: That clarification would clean up some of the misconceptions in the media releases that created confusion over the figure of $200 million over five years. Remember also that that is within the current operations. No one can say that we will not be in another war three years from now, and all of those figures will be shot out of the water. It is a reference point that has created confusion; and we would like clarification.
Senator Day: It would be helpful to have clarification. As a final point, we know there have been many reviews of the New Veterans Charter, including this one by the committee. We have a great deal of evidence, which you have had an opportunity to follow.
There have been other internal reviews of the New Veterans Charter as well as outside reviews by other independent groups. Are the first two announcements and the others that will follow the result of these various reviews?
Ms. Williamson: Yes. Some of the concerns voiced by stakeholders, advisory groups and parliamentary committees spoke to the need for increased monthly financial support for individuals. The three announcements made on September 19 are intended to address some of the immediate concerns and issues brought forward about the need for additional monthly support.
Senator Day: The fact that over four years only 16 veterans are in the Permanent Impairment Allowance program — and you must have known a year ago that there were only 14 and the year before that there were fewer — did this not raise a red flag prior to 2010 that something had to change?
Ms. Williamson: Information has been coming forward, and the government has taken action at this time to address that information.
Senator Day: You were aware of the problem previously, but the action is being taken now.
Ms. Williamson: Information has been forthcoming from a variety of stakeholders, our advisory council and committees with respect to changes and concerns over the way in which the New Veterans Charter supports CF veterans.
Senator Day: Internally, you were aware that there were only 16 veterans last year and 14 the year before who were receiving the allowance.
The Chair: You made the point Senator Day, and I agree. May I request that you come back to this at a later date?
Senator Day: No; I did not receive an answer. The witness talked about reports from outside, but I said that internally they must have seen that before this year.
The Chair: Senator Day, you have raised the point. We are coming back to the same subject, hopefully with the same witnesses, in two weeks, when we will pursue this further. The timeliness of this could be in question, and that is a fair question that Senator Day raises.
We have run out of time today, so we will catch some of the supplemental questions at the next meeting. I would like the witnesses to be prepared to speak to the proposed legislation next time and why it was necessary to use the legislation format. Why was the New Veterans Charter written in this legislative format versus simply going back to Treasury Board, which was not necessarily in the spirit of the original work that was done leading to the writing of that legislation?
We will look at that with Mr. Lalonde, who was involved from the outset, I believe.
Thank you for your patience. I would remind you that we will get into greater detail in two weeks.
Ladies and gentlemen, this session is over.
(The committee adjourned.)
|
