Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs

Issue 2 - Evidence

OTTAWA, Wednesday, December 12, 2007

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, veterans of war and peacekeeping missions and members of their families in recognition of their services to Canada.

Senator Michael A. Meighen ( Chair ) in the chair.

[ English ]

The Chair: Honourable senators, we are here to discuss with the officials from Veterans Affairs Canada the implementation of the New Veterans Charter, which was enacted in April 2006, subsequent to the passage of Bill C-45, to provide services, assistance and compensation to or in respect of Canadian Forces members and veterans, and to make amendments to certain acts.

When the Minister of Veterans Affairs last appeared before the subcommittee on May 31, 2006, he described the new charter as ``a new path, a living, breathing document that will evolve with the changing needs of our veterans and their families.''

The charter has now been in place for more than a year and a half; as such, it can be reviewed to determine whether its implementation has been as effective as it was intended to be and if, indeed, it is an evolving, living, breathing document.

To further explore this issue, I wish to welcome Suzanne Tining, Deputy Minister, Veterans Affairs Canada. Ms. Tining was appointed Deputy Minister of Veterans Affairs Canada in January 2007. It is a particular pleasure for me to see her back here. We have travelled together on one or two pilgrimages, the last being to Vimy for the celebration there. Ms. Tining is devoted to the best interests of our veterans. We also welcome to this meeting Verna Bruce, Associate Deputy Minister, Veterans Affairs Canada. Ms. Bruce joined Veterans Affairs Canada in January 1998 as the Associate Deputy Minister.

Before we begin, I shall introduce our subcommittee members. Senator Kenny is the Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence. To my left is Senator Day from New Brunswick. Senator Banks is here as well. Senator Downe is a frequent visitor to our committee.

Ms. Tining, I hand the floor over to you. After your statement, I hope you will entertain a few questions.

Suzanne Tining, Deputy Minister, Veterans Affairs Canada: Thank you.

As the chair said, I joined the department in January of this year. There are very few jobs that are as rewarding as serving those who have generously served Canada, and I feel privileged and blessed at having been asked to serve as Deputy Minister of Veterans Affairs Canada.

I am impressed by the dedication of the departmental officials and employees. They are people with a deep personal interest in making sure that we do right by our veterans. Ms. Bruce, who has been with the department for many years, led the department in the right direction.

[ Translation ]

With your permission, I have prepared some opening remarks to highlight a number of topics that I hope will be of interest to the committee. It has been an incredibly busy year. We have seen a great deal of activity in both areas of our departmental mandate: in veterans' services and benefits, as well as in commemoration.

[ English ]

Let me start with commemoration — because we talked about trips. It is not the only way we do commemoration, but it is one of the ways we make sure the contribution of our veterans is remembered.

As a department, it is not only our job but we feel it is our duty to keep the memory of our veterans' sacrifice and accomplishments alive. We do this through a variety of the ways, from helping to restore Canada's cenotaphs to highlighting important events in our military history.

[ Translation ]

In April of this year, we observed the 90th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge and dedicated the newly restored Vimy Memorial. We placed special emphasis on youth involvement through the active participation of 5,000 young Canadians at the event in France.

This year, we also marked the 90th anniversary of the Battle of Passchendaele and the 65th anniversary of the Raid on Dieppe.

[ English ]

Remembrance is certainly an essential part of what we do, but it would be a hollow gesture if we did not back it up with service. We constantly strive for the highest quality of care and quality of life for our more than 200,000 clients and their families.

After all, service is our line of business at Veterans Affairs. The department's budget for this year is almost $3.4 billion. A large proportion of that goes toward disability benefits, allowances and economic support, and health care benefits.

[ Translation ]

In other words, this funding goes directly to the care and support of veterans and their families. For evidence of this care and support, we need not look further than the New Veterans Charter.

[ English ]

The New Veterans Charter, which came into effect in April of last year, represents a fundamental and necessary change of direction. Most of our new veterans are in their late thirties when they leave the Canadian Forces. The services that the department continues to provide to our traditional veterans are clearly much different than those required by our new veterans. The focus of the new charter is to help these new veterans and their families make a successful transition to civilian life.

The new veterans have been doing an important and challenging job. They are still young. They want to continue to contribute and to support their families, but it is not always easy.

The New Veterans Charter offers a suite of benefits that responds specifically to the transition of veterans who became disabled. These benefits replaced the monthly Veterans Affairs disability pension with a lump sum disability award to provide immediate financial opportunities for the veteran and his or her family and offer a sense of finality. This award, coupled with the wellness programs that are part of the charter, can help veterans and their families focus on a new life and a career path.

The package of wellness programs includes health benefits — physical, psychosocial and vocational rehabilitation — and pays an earnings loss benefit while they are participating in the rehabilitation program. If the veteran is permanently disabled and unable to work, the earnings loss benefit, which is 75 per cent of his or her pre-release salary, will continue until age 65.

Upon the death or permanent disability of a veteran, support is also provided to the spouse to pursue training if he or she wishes to re-enter the workforce.

Finally, the New Veterans Charter includes a job placement program, which was launched in October of this year. This program lets the new veteran sit down with a coach to determine what skills can be transferred to civilian life and how to package them for a civilian employer. The job placement program includes active job search training, career counselling and job-finding assistance.

[ Translation ]

All of us at Veterans Affairs Canada are pleased with the response to the new Charter.

[ English ]

Already more than 4,600 Canadian Forces veterans, members and their families have received services and support under the New Veterans Charter. As of November 30 of this year, we have approved more than 1,600 applications for the rehab program, with an encouraging 92 per cent approval rate.

[ Translation ]

These results tell us that the charter is doing for veterans what it is intended to do.

[ English ]

In addition, we have approved more than 1,400 earnings loss applications and over 5,000 lump sum disability awards.

The New Veterans Charter has been designed largely as a result of ongoing consultations with veterans organizations and other involved groups. As we continue to implement the charter, these consultations remain ongoing, which should allow us to have a living charter, which is a commitment of the minister and the government, where we can address emerging needs as they become priorities, make adjustments as the needs of clients change and explore and address any potential gaps that may present barriers to a client's transition to civilian life.

[ Translation ]

In other words, we are always ready to look at ideas for improvement. Our veterans, no matter what age, deserve the best. We are determined to see that they get it, today and always.

[ English ]

As a complement to the new charter, and in response to clients' needs, we are putting a special emphasis on advancing our mental health strategy. As you know, the number of operational stress injury cases has tripled in the past five years — from just over 1,500 to more than 6,500.

Budget 2007 provided $9 million to double the number of operational stress injury clinics that we operate across the country. This will give us ten clinics in total, not counting the five similar centres operated by the Department of National Defence on bases, centres that we work with very closely.

[ Translation ]

To support these efforts, we have established a Centre of Expertise at Ste. Anne's Hospital. This will also ensure that Canada continues to be at the leading edge in operational stress injury research and treatment.

[ English ]

The centre at Ste. Anne's Hospital provides clinical leadership to an integrated network of clinics across the country. Because we know the impact of an operational stress injury can go well beyond the individual, Budget 2007 provided an additional $1 million to enhance the services we provide to families.

The last initiative I want to touch on is something that has and will keep us busy over the next several months. The department has undertaken a comprehensive review of its health care services. We are examining the services that are so critical to the healthy aging of veterans and their caregivers. The average age of our traditional war veteran is 84, with almost 2,000 passing away each month.

[ Translation ]

We want all our veterans to age as well as possible and to receive the most appropriate benefits and services at the right time and place.

[ English ]

In order to remain independent as long as possible, veterans need health care that offers choices — choices in care settings and community-based, assisted-living options, including greater access to the Veterans Independence Program. Using our successful Veterans Independence Program as a model, we envision a program that is more flexible and supportive and that assists across the full spectrum of needs as our veterans age.

Those are my opening remarks. Ms. Bruce and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.

[ Translation ]

The Chair: Thank you for your remarks. I found them very interesting. I am sure that senators must have a number of questions as a result.

[ English ]

I see that Senator Nancy Ruth has joined us.

Senator Day will begin the questioning.

Senator Day: There are 200,000 clients and their families. Does that 200,000 number include all veterans under the new charter plus the traditional veterans from the conflicts of yesterday?

Ms. Tining: The 200,000 clients are all the clients that we serve as a department. They would include the currently serving members, the traditional veterans and their survivors.

Senator Day: You have indicated 4,600 Canadian Forces veterans. Are they included in the 200,000?

Ms. Tining: Yes.

Senator Day: Of the 200,000, 4,600 come under the New Veterans Charter.

Ms. Tining: That is correct.

Senator Day: You mentioned a significant increase in operational stress injuries, from 1,500 to 6,500, but only 4,600 veterans are your clients. Therefore, we can assume that about 2,000 veterans suffer operational stress and are not your clients.

Ms. Tining: They have not come to us yet. They could be receiving services from DND if they are serving currently. These statistics are the result of ongoing research to assess the trends.

Senator Day: You have an outreach program with the Canadian Forces and, presumably, for former members of the Canadian Forces who are not receiving service but who might need it.

Ms. Tining: We have worked closely with the Department of National Defence and will continue to do so. We have a joint steering committee and working committee chaired by an ADM in the Department of Veterans Affairs and a major-general from DND. They look at all of the programs and services provided by both organizations.

They are finalizing a recent piece of work that involves mapping all the programs and services of the two organizations to determine whether we have overlaps and/or gaps and to determine where one organization is better placed to provide a particular service.

The committee has been in place since the late 1990s, I believe. It is fair to say that there is cooperation in the acknowledgment that we are serving the same individuals. These people can be serving one day and become veterans the next day, so it makes sense to align our organizational strengths. We should not get caught up in the silo effect of our respective organizations; we should not build walls between DND and Veterans Affairs. More and more, we are trying to direct the discussions with a focus on determining the needs and meeting those needs in advance of their requirement.

Senator Day: If a member of the Canadian Armed Forces is planning to retire — and the average age is the late thirties, you say — does he or she have contact with Veterans Affairs automatically, regardless of whether he or she has an injury?

Ms. Tining: Veterans Affairs has a transition interview with currently serving members six months before their release. We have a notification process whereby DND informs us six months prior to release. Hence, we have initial contact with the serving member to begin preparations for the day of his or her release.

Senator Day: DND has a new program to accommodate within the forces individuals who might have suffered a minor disability as a result of injury while serving in the Armed Forces. Traditionally, those individuals could not stay with the Armed Forces, but now they can stay in a different capacity, perhaps. Do you have a continuing role to help these individuals with their new responsibilities within the Department of National Defence?

Ms. Tining: I am aware that DND and the Chief of the Defence Staff have made a commitment to not release currently serving members who have been impacted or injured. As a result, we have not yet seen as clients any who have been released from the Afghanistan conflict, although we provide services to currently serving members that have been injured. On the work front, Veterans Affairs does not have any tools to provide some support to currently serving members.

Senator Day: You just said that you do provide some services to currently serving members of the Canadian Forces.

Ms. Tining: We would provide disability awards. For example, someone who is injured — say, an injury to an elbow or a wrist — could be awarded disability for the pain and suffering of that injury and still be able to continue to serve.

Senator Day: I should like to explore the relationship between the Canadian Forces and your role under the New Veterans Charter.

You said that the average age of the traditional veteran is 84 years and the average age of your new client is in the late thirties. There must be a tremendous change in the kinds of service provided by individuals in the various offices of Veterans Affairs across the country. You must still be going through that transition because the New Veterans Charter is only one year old. Have you hired new staff or have you retrained those who served 84-year-old veterans so that they can properly serve 30-year-old veterans. Could you explain the challenges?

Ms. Tining: All of the above applies, as the short answer. I will ask Ms. Bruce to comment further because she has been with the Veterans Affairs for a longer period of time.

The challenge that we continue to face is the tremendous change for all of the staff, not only the services that we provide but also the expectations. There is a generational difference between the older and younger veterans in the way they want to be served and in the way they expect service to be provided to them.

For many of our staff, it has been, and still is, a difficult adjustment. Some of our staff have struggled, and we have had to move some to different positions because the struggle was too difficult. However, I would say that the vast majority of our staff members have adapted well to serving both age groups of veterans, although it is a challenge.

The other reality we face is that over the next five years 30 per cent of our employees will become eligible for retirement. In preparation, we are hiring staff for that transition so that the working knowledge can be passed along. We are helping staff to adapt, hiring new staff and providing ongoing training in new programs and services as a result of the New Veterans Charter.

Senator Day: Do you have enough money to do everything?

Ms. Tining: As a seasoned politician, I should say, no, but we have been provided with the resources that we need to deliver the job.

Senator Day: Is the job that you are doing defined by the amount of money you have?

Ms. Tining: I would say no, but Ms. Bruce may wish to comment.

When we went to cabinet with the New Veterans Charter, we had defined the outcomes we wanted to achieve, how we would get there and the resources required to do that. We received the funding to meet those goals.

As I said, there are bound to be some gaps, and we are beginning to see areas that are not addressed in the New Veterans Charter. It is incumbent upon us to provide that business case — for example, we received money to meet the requirements as set out in the NVC, but some needs are not being met so we will present those needs and make the case for additional funding.

Some of my colleagues, and perhaps some ministers around the table, might think that Veterans Affairs has received a great deal of money in recent years, but that debate will have to happen at the cabinet table.

Senator Day: I have looked at the estimates, but I do not recall whether there is a separate entry for NVC activities apart from the traditional entries for Veterans Affairs. Do you do that?

Ms. Tining: We go with disability and health.

Senator Day: Disability could be either.

Verna Bruce, Associate Deputy Minister, Veterans Affairs Canada: We break it down in the disability program by the traditional pensions and the new disability awards and other allowances. I have not gone through what shows up in the published estimates — but that information is readily available.

Senator Day: Could I or any of my colleagues determine how much more money in 2007 you received to implement your new obligations under the New Veterans Charter? What is that figure?

Ms. Tining: I have a bad memory for numbers. It is on a sheet here.

Senator Day: In your introductory remarks, you referred to $9 million to double the number of occupational stress injury clinics and another $1 million to provide services to families.

Ms. Tining: That was attached to the mental health strategy, which you can say is part of the New Veterans Charter. Our budget in 2007 was $10 million plus $13.7 million to help us with the traditional veterans. We also had money for the creation of the ombudsman.

Ms. Bruce: In the early days of the New Veterans Charter, we received an additional $200 million a year for each of the first five years. It was a $1-billion investment to provide services to Canadian Forces veterans through the New Veterans Charter. We also received funding for implementation.

I will have to confirm the numbers, but we had a significant increase of about $20 million in the first year for implementation to do all the required legal work. Following the implementation and design phase, we also received funding on an ongoing basis.

Senator Day: Could provide a summary of that to our clerk?

Senator Nancy Ruth: I am always interested in gender issues — and particularly here in terms of the mental health strategy. How many women are dealing with stress in your combined 15 centres and which programs are gender sensitive?

Ms. Tining: Do you mean the number of women being served or the number of women actually providing the services?

Senator Nancy Ruth: Those you are providing services to, as a percentage of the total numbers you are serving.

Ms. Tining: I do not know the exact figure for women, but I will provide it. I know that men are the majority.

Senator Nancy Ruth: That is partly why I am asking. Are the programs designed to be gender sensitive for those who are not men? When you have a dominant group, sometimes they forget to adapt the programs.

Ms. Bruce: In terms of the approach taken, we were cognizant when we started working with the OSI — operational stress injury — clinics that our client base is not only the veteran but also the veteran's family. The clinics are family centred in terms of the services they provide. We also designed it to allow a veteran's spouse to call for assistance without having to involve the veteran. Sometimes families need help when the veteran might not be in a space to understand what they need.

Senator Nancy Ruth: You mean when they refuse help?

Ms. Bruce: Yes. The clinics were designed for use as a family unit or as a veteran, but particularly to include the families. We conducted focus groups during the creation of the New Veterans Charter. Some of those done with only the women were unbelievable.

I may have told this story before, so forgive me if I did. We brought in the spouses of some of the more severely disabled veterans. One of the women in the group was eager to tell her story quickly during the focus group because she had left her two children in a van in the parking garage. She could not trust her husband, to leave them at home with him, because he knew how to kill and he was going through a bad time.

That was an eye-opener for our policy people. It brought a fundamental change to how we developed the programs under the New Veterans Charter.

Senator Nancy Ruth: However, you do not know if there are specific programs for women veterans? There was a program on CBC radio this morning about women coming out of the Canadian Forces and how their post-traumatic stress syndrome impacted them in a way that seemed to be different than for male veterans. That is the information I am looking for, and whether psychiatric services are gender sensitive.

Ms. Tining: We do not have a program specifically for women. The program and the services we offer are based on an individual's needs. In that sense, I would hope we are able to accommodate and to serve women in the right way.

Senator Nancy Ruth: Have the psychiatrists or psychologists who are employed in these various programs been trained in gender sensitivity? If they have not, is that something your department would look into?

Ms. Tining: I can look into that.

Senator Banks: I have two questions having to do with the criteria for veterans. I received two phone calls in the last couple of months from people who have served in the Canadian Forces. They said they were not being treated as veterans because they had not been overseas.

In respect of the Veterans Allowance Act, is there a distinction for World War II veterans, for example, in their eligibility for benefits between soldiers, sailors or airmen who served their entire time in Canada and those who served overseas?

Ms. Tining: The definition of a veteran is someone who has been released from the Canadian Forces. What you are getting at is veterans being entitled to a specific service. With the veterans health services review, we are trying to move away from complicated, entitlement-based programs and services.

The department has evolved over the last 60 years. It started with a basket of programs and services to meet the needs of Canadian Forces members returning from the last world war. You can imagine the web of entitlements that has developed over 60 years. If you served overseas for so many days, you would be entitled to this basket of services. If you served in Canada and you had this or that or the other thing, you were entitled to a different basket of services. It is a complicated way for the department to offer the programs and services and for veterans to know their entitlements.

Shortly after my arrival in the department, I commented that I was amazed that our people can actually provide services to veterans. Our employees not only have to understand that roadmap of entitlements, but to get to the need and try to find ways to provide that veteran's needs.

We are trying to move from an entitlement base to a needs base. Our vision of the future is that it does not matter whether a veteran served overseas or here; rather, what is the need and how can we provide that service?

Senator Banks: Is that the case now, that it does not matter whether a veteran served overseas, that the services are there as required and needed by the veteran?

Ms. Tining: It is not there in the full sense of what you said.

Senator Banks: The reason I ask is because many of those veterans are now approaching the end of the point where they will be in need of anything.

Ms. Tining: Yes.

Senator Banks: Just so I understand, suppose I was an infantryman and was enlisted in an infantry regiment or a pilot and went into training in World War II. I enlisted in that service to do a job. Let us say it was determined that I had a particular skill, such as teaching others to be infantrymen or pilots. For that reason, although I wanted very much to go to France or Hong Kong, I was posted to do that teaching job in Canada. At no time during World War II did I go overseas with a bayonet fixed to the end of my gun or fly a fighter plane in Australia. Would that person, who wanted to fight but did not and stayed in Canada, today be entitled to the same benefits as those who had that opportunity to fight?

Ms. Tining: The short answer is no. Ms. Bruce will explain.

Ms. Bruce: It is really complicated. If you were a Canadian service veteran — I know very well a veteran in my own family who fits the description you just described — and that service veteran were to be injured in Canada as a direct result of their service, they could be eligible for a disability pension. They could be eligible for small amounts of other programs, but it would all depend on the circumstances. They would not be eligible for the same benefits as someone who served overseas and was injured, and that is different from someone who served overseas and was not injured.

We have an eligibility chart that I actually carry with me because I cannot figure this stuff out. Back to the deputy's point, it is so complicated, which is why we have been taking a look at how to address what veterans need rather than what they want. The answer to your question is no.

Senator Banks: We are not there yet.

Ms. Bruce: No.

Senator Banks: What about that same person — the one in your family and the one I described — with respect to the pension, per se? Not eligibility for a disability pension but just a pension. Is there also a distinction in that respect as between those two people?

Ms. Bruce: If you are thinking about the War Veterans Allowance, which is like the social assistance program, again that varies depending on whether you served overseas or in Canada. It is also based strictly on income and the income levels. If you have more income, then you are not eligible. There are some Canada service veterans who can become eligible for the War Veterans Allowance under certain circumstances. Again, it would be interesting to have the name of the person that you are interested in and take a look at the case.

Senator Banks: I will give you some. There is more than one.

You will remember the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan.

Ms. Bruce: Yes.

Senator Banks: There were Canadians who enlisted in the RCAF and became trainers of pilots or navigators or, in those days, air gunners. Having enlisted, they were asked to take an unpaid leave of absence from the RCAF to go to work in private companies and associations that were delivering pilot training. That training was all across the country, usually given by flying schools. These RCAF people were in effect seconded to those flying schools — still paid the same — and were reintroduced into the forces when the BCATP was over. I will give you the name of one individual in particular who is now 92 years old and found that he was not eligible for the time served because he only served the first couple of days in the RCAF and the few months after the end of the BCATP. The intervening time — while he was in effect ordered to take leave without pay and work for the same money for another training deliverer — was not counted in his service. Is that a situation which obtains with people, to your knowledge, and is it right? Can something be done about it? What I am getting at is that it seems unfair.

Ms. Tining: Yes. Fairness is not always possible if you go with the letter of the regulation that governs our programs and services.

Given the example you provided us, what we would do and what we are doing is discussing with DND to determine if there is a way for DND to help us out by providing some rationale to consider the time served training, after having been asked to do so, as military service. The determination of military service is not our doing; it is DND's doing. We are speaking with them now.

Senator Banks: I did not know that. That is revelatory.

Ms. Tining: We take the military file, what is there, and they make the determination.

Senator Banks: Would the director of personnel at DND have made that determination? To whom would you have made that request?

Ms. Tining: We would have looked at the file, and the file would have said that he served 42 days. In order to access the service that he requires, he would need to have served a full year. That is the example we have here.

Senator Banks: The example I gave you is 15 days short of 365.

Ms. Tining: We are placed in a position where, 15 days or 200 days, the same rule governs us. It is not fair, but that is the rule. In cases like the one you described, we are trying to see if any flexibility could be exercised by the DND in determining military service and having perhaps a different category of military service. We do not know if that is doable, but those are the conversations we are having now.

Senator Banks: Would you be good enough to tell the clerk the names of the people at DND with whom you are corresponding in that respect? Thank you very much.

Senator Day: Would the information on this individual, or individuals like him, pertaining to the other service he performed while not in uniform, but for the war effort, even be on the file that the Department of Veterans Affairs sees?

Ms. Tining: I do not know if it would be on the file. Every case would be different. My library and archive colleague and I went to see where we store all the files of Canada's serving members. Files are very thick to not so thick. I am not sure if every file will comprise the same amount of information. It may be true for one and not for the other. I would not be able to say.

I do not want to go sideways here, but his challenge was that he would need lots of money to just clean up the files, to ensure that only the essential documents were kept in the file because that would cut his storage costs. However, from the information we have here, he does not have the money to clean the files, the necessary documents. Without having specific information, I am not sure the information would be there. It may be there in some cases and not others.

Ms. Bruce: Perhaps I could add a point of clarification. The deputy is right. We pick files created by DND during World War II, and it is up to the Department of National Defence to determine the number of days the person served.

The interesting thing about the BCATP is that we understand that people had an option. Even though they were ordered to go to work for the school, they could go while they were still a DND employee and be paid a DND rate. Alternatively, if they wanted to get paid more, they could have almost cut their service with DND, opted for an unpaid leave, and then taken the higher amount of money offered by the private sector. Unfortunately, we believe what may have happened then is that meant they could not count that time as service time with the Canadian military.

Again, we are just getting into some of the research, but that is where it led in one of the cases we reviewed. One could understand a young man thinking that if he could get paid a dollar a day more, maybe he would take it, not realizing that it would create a situation where he would not meet the service requirements.

Senator Banks: That is helpful.

The Chair: I wonder if I could ask you to repeat something for my edification.

I think I heard you say that you were planning to do a review, essentially cut red tape, at least within your sphere of jurisdiction, so the delivery of services and benefits to elderly people, in particular, could be more expeditious and efficacious.

Ms. Tining: We are doing more than planning and review. We have been active doing the health care services review for well over a year in order to address the needs of our traditional veterans. It is very much on its way. We are reaching the point where we should be able to provide options to government that would be focused on needs.

The Chair: Will that come shortly?

Ms. Tining: Yes. This government has made that commitment, one that our minister has made public, saying that he has instructed his officials to complete a health care services review. We have been busy at it for some time.

A huge amount of work has been done. In the foreseeable future, I think that we should present it to government and hopefully obtain their approval to proceed.

Frankly, time is running out and the clock is ticking. We are talking about people who are 84 years of age and are in the last years of their lives. We cannot take four years to figure out what they need, and we cannot take two additional years to get organized to do it. That is where we are coming from.

[ Translation ]

The Chair: My congratulations: let me encourage you to proceed as quickly as possible.

[ English ]

Senator Banks: You said that you are addressing the question of the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan people. Are you also addressing the question we talked about earlier regarding the infantryman or pilot who enrolled and was, in effect, ordered to stay in Canada and is therefore, through no choice of his own, not eligible for some of those benefits? Are you pursuing that as well?

Ms. Tining: In the world we envision, it would not matter where you served. We are moving from entitlements-based to needs-based. If you are a veteran with needs who has been released from the Canadian Forces, we will be looking at how we can address those needs. However, there will be limits.

Senator Banks: Are you pursuing that with the same alacrity as with the other question you addressed? In other words, shortly?

Ms. Tining: Yes. It is all part of the health care services review.

The Chair: I will call on Senator Kenny. It is appropriate that I do so since, as you correctly pointed out, half of the story is generated elsewhere and you are presented with a DND file. As chair of the main committee, Senator Kenny might come to the conclusion that it would be advantageous to hear from some of the DND people about the way in which those files are put together and whether the same type of review, with the same speed, could be undertaken at that end.

Senator Kenny: I certainly endorsed that during lunch time on Wednesday. Are you yet in a position to make a business case for the various entitlements or restrictions that are there? Your chart reminds me of the organization chart of Homeland Security in the United States.

Ms. Tining: That is not necessarily positive, I guess.

Senator Kenny: I was not being complimentary. It seems that an inordinate amount of time is spent by veterans getting minuscule increases in their benefits. A large amount of thought, effort and work is put in by the people who do the evaluation. They are dancing on the head of a pin to figure out a way to get this person some sort of benefits. There are huge associated costs. I am curious, for example, about overhead costs versus payout costs in the department. In the process of moving from an entitlements-based program to a needs-based program, if you could eliminate various positions and hearings, the business case might even turn out that you would save money and in fact increase benefits.

Let the record show the witness is nodding.

Ms. Tining: As soon as you complete your question, I have something I would like to say.

Senator Kenny: I am finished for the moment.

Ms. Tining: I could not agree with you more. As I often say to the teams, I think there will be a time where I would say the stars are aligned and that there will be an appetite to hear this story and to hear the business case.

From a purely fiscal standpoint, we are not in the middle of a period where we do not have any money. Frankly, it is a government decision as to how they allocate the money. Our job is to present the business case. I am fairly confident that we have a strong case to present and a good story to tell about why we need to change and what that will require.

When I talk about moving from entitlements-based to needs-based, the other piece that is very much part of that review is to simplify the process whereby a client, veteran or family member accesses our services as well as the process whereby our people provide that service. I will give you an example.

In the Veterans Independence Program, we have housekeeping and grounds maintenance for a veteran who would like to stay in his home. He has to go through the entitlement process. Let us say he is given access to that program. However, with respect to the administrative minutia, there is a request for $1,200 per year on ground maintenance. Our auditors are happy because we have all of the documents in the file.

One of our options is to say: We will explore the avenue of providing a grant. Frankly, we do not care which provider a veteran uses to clear the snow. We will provide an amount of money for that service. That will be the case for everyone. Some may obtain the service for less and some may pay more, but at the end of the day the administration costs involved far out-value the money out the door.

Therefore, we are looking at simplifying things in the health services review. As I said, I think we have a strong business case to present, and hopefully common sense will prevail. Our part of the work is to illustrate the business case with real case examples that do not seem to make sense and hopefully obtain support for a new way of doing things.

Senator Kenny: Can you give the committee some sense of the breakdown of overhead versus payout in the department?

Ms. Tining: I know that we are one of the lowest departments in terms of overhead due to the sheer volume of our transactions. We had a budget of $3.4 billion last year.

Do you remember the overhead percentage, Ms. Bruce?

Ms. Bruce: It was about $250 million, and that would include running Ste. Anne's Hospital, all of our staff and the money that we provide to organizations like the Commonwealth War Graves Commission. Our actual staffing overhead is very low.

Ms. Tining: It depends on how you define ``overhead,'' as we all know. I have been a public servant for over 30 years now. I would say that Veterans Affairs Canada is one of the very few operational departments left in the federal public service that provides direct services to citizens, in our case, veterans and their families. Because of the nature of the department, which is very much operational, there is not a high percentage of overhead. On the other hand, the folks who deliver our services go through an inordinate amount of red tape, which I would say is overhead but does not qualify as overhead.

Senator Downe: In your statement today you indicated that when a veteran dies or is permanently disabled you provide support to the spouse to pursue training if they want to re-enter the workforce. Could you elaborate on that program?

Ms. Tining: In the New Veterans Charter, the rehab program is available to the veteran or to his or her spouse because the veteran may not be in a position where he either is capable or wants to enter a rehab program. In that case, if the spouse were willing to re-enter the workforce or to be trained in a different field of work because that would become the family's income, then services would be available to that spouse.

Senator Downe: Do you know if there has been much interest in this program? Has there been participation in the first year at all?

Ms. Tining: Do you mean on the spouse side?

Senator Downe: Yes.

Ms. Tining: I have the overall number on the rehab application and approval rate. I could certainly look into how many spouses are part of that number and provide that to the clerk.

Senator Downe: I would appreciate that.

Further to Senator Kenny's comment, one way to reduce overhead is not to have to retrain staff constantly. That is one of the tremendous benefits you have — and, chair, this is a free-time political broadcast — of being located in Charlottetown, where the opportunities for federal public servants to relocate are greatly diminished compared to Ottawa where there is much movement between departments. Obviously, the department's major responsibility is to provide benefits for veterans or dependents and families and the administrative work you do for the RCMP and others. However, the government made a policy decision at the time they relocated the department, and other governments have continued, about the importance of the location of the department in Prince Edward Island. I know, as deputy, you are sensitive to that fact. I have heard from a number of employees in the department about how pleased they are that you have relocated to Prince Edward Island, how important that is to the staff who work there.

Mr. Chair, I can tell you that the deputy is totally integrated in Prince Edward Island because I picked up the local newspaper a few weeks ago and there was a cover photo of the department at a good fundraising cause. The deputy and others had on an Anne-of-Green-Gables hat and the red wig, I believe.

Ms. Tining: That was in the context of the workplace charitable campaign. Not only were Ms. Bruce and I dressed as Anne of Green Gables, but we had to compete with three other people who were also dressed that way: a police officer, the radio station representative and the Guardian newspaper reporter. There were five of us dressed as Anne of Green Gables, and we had to compete in a scooter race in the atrium of the D.J. MacDonald Building in Charlottetown — the things we have to do in our jobs.

The story made page 3 of the Guardian because, of course, the Guardian reporter was there. My dad reads that paper online, and I was scared to even phone and find out if he had recognized me. He had not, so that was good.

Senator Downe: All of that is to say that there are close to 1,400 employees at the department now, and the reports I hear about the new deputy minister are all positive. I hear that constantly when I am in the community.

The Chair: I am not surprised, but it is good to hear. If you can ever file with the committee any of this damaging evidence it would be appreciated.

Senator Downe: I think it is classified now, chair, and you will never see it again.

The Chair: In my case, and it may be the same for the other senators, I get more queries and mail about the VIP program than almost anything else.

As I recall, if a veteran had not been a beneficiary of the VIP program prior to — help me please?

Ms. Tining: Prior to 1981.

The Chair: — then that was that and the surviving spouse would not have any access.

Ms. Tining: That is right.

The Chair: We cannot be talking about a lot of people. It may well have been that there were a number, but not many, who were relatively well off in 1981, which is now 26 years ago. With the early death, perhaps, of the so-called breadwinner, the income of the surviving spouse, to put it in the vernacular, ``ain't what it used to be,'' but unfortunately that person cannot apply. If I were king of the world, what would it take to change that situation and say that any surviving spouse of a veteran who is in need is entitled to receive a benefit? Would it not just mean simply changing the regulation, or is it more complicated? I am asking about the mechanics of it all.

Ms. Tining: It can be as complicated or as simple as you want it to be.

The Chair: What would happen if I passed a new regulation, an order-in-council?

Ms. Tining: Currently we say primary caregivers. For the longest time it was the widows, but now it is the primary caregivers. According to our figures, there are 285,000 primary caregivers alive today.

The Chair: Just because they are the spouse they are therefore a primary caregiver?

Ms. Tining: Yes.

The Chair: Spouse equals primary caregiver?

Ms. Tining: Yes. Currently, 28,000 receive the VIP; therefore, 265,000 primary caregivers do not access the VIP. If you were to say today that we remove that condition, for a primary caregiver to have access to the Veterans Independence Program, the veteran had to have received that service before his or her death. The program was started in 1981, so no primary caregiver before 1981 got any access to it, nor any veteran.

The short answer is, if you were to open it up to all primary caregivers —

The Chair: In need.

Ms. Tining: In need, that is right.

The Chair: Not people who are very well off but primary caregivers of a deceased veteran.

Ms. Tining: Yes.

The Chair: I guess, theoretically, I could be opening it up to a very large number of people.

Ms. Tining: Yes.

The Chair: Except that we do not know, relatively speaking, how many on the needs side would likely qualify or not qualify.

Ms. Tining: That is right. That is all part of our health services review.

Senator Nancy Ruth: You are looking at it.

Ms. Tining: We are looking at it. When I said earlier that we are looking at a needs-based program, it is needs-based for the veterans, and the primary caregivers to some extent, as it relates to the Veterans Independence Program.

The Chair: What do you mean by ``to some extent''?

Ms. Tining: When you look at pensions or health services, the primary caregivers do not have access to all of the services that the veterans have.

The Chair: I am thinking of the Veterans Independence Program.

Ms. Tining: We hear a lot about the VIP. Part of our review is to deal with what you and many of your colleagues and many members of Parliament are hearing all the time, which is about primary caregivers needing the Veterans Independence Program and not being able to access it. It would be part of the business case we are preparing.

Senator Downe: Have you determined what it would cost to cover everyone?

Ms. Tining: We are in the process of finalizing the costing for the business case, yes.

Senator Nancy Ruth: Can you give us a ballpark figure? If I said 20,000 times how many widows/caregivers are in need?

Senator Banks: That would be 285,000.

Senator Downe: By my count, it would be 257,000.

Senator Day: There are 28,000 on the VIP program and 285,000 who are eligible, so multiply by 10.

Ms. Tining: I will let the senators figure out the numbers.

As you may have discovered in discussion with our respected colleagues in the Department of Finance and at Treasury Board, part of our business case is that the costs will not go on forever; these costs will peak. Our estimation is that in 2011 you will see quite a drop in the services that traditional veterans and primary caregivers will need because they will be in the final years of their lives.

Whatever the number is — it may be 10 times — it is a blip and will go down. Often, departments ask for money in their A base and that carries on forever. That is not case we are making here. We are saying that we need this for all these reasons and this is how we will do it. That is the amount of money we need. However, five years from now, you will see a decline. We will not keep the money in the department — we cannot keep the money. Our money is tied to the number of clients we are serving. It is a pretty safe risk, frankly, from a financial standpoint.

The Chair: It seems to be an obvious case to make, but it is difficult.

Senator Nancy Ruth: Is part of the fear that if you do it for this group of veterans, you will have to do it for every group thereafter? Is there a fear that there will also be hundreds of millions of dollars for the veterans who went to Afghanistan?

The Chair: But there are fewer veterans who went to Afghanistan than there are World War II veterans.

Senator Nancy Ruth: Yes, but is that part of the internal debate?

Ms. Tining: I have not sensed that there is a fear of that. Like anything else, with a big number of clients comes a big number of dollars. In the last two years, Veterans Affairs Canada has been quite successful in putting a solid business case in front of government to get additional monies. It is not about trying to get more money for the department as a power grab. It is a question of investing or providing taxpayers' dollars for meaningful service for the people who served our country.

Senator Kenny: You cannot send people to war if you do not take care of the wounded.

Ms. Tining: A few weekends ago, I was in Toronto for the Grey Cup weekend. One of the sponsors was the Department of National Defence. They had all of their equipment at the Toronto Congress Centre, for example, their helicopters and tanks.

The Chair: Can they get one or two over to Afghanistan?

Ms. Tining: They had equipment there, including what they use as operating rooms in Afghanistan. The young men and women who were in attendance were great public affairs people for recruitment. They were very keen. I talked to one of the young men who was close to that piece of equipment. He asked me, ``What do you do?'' I said, ``I work for Veterans Affairs Canada.'' I did not say that I am deputy minister. He said, ``I am expecting you to take care of me and my family when I need it.'' It makes a lot of sense. The folks who are over there expect to be taken care of and they expect their families to be taken care of. I think that is part of the contract.

Senator Day: I wish to talk about your mental health strategy and, in particular, the centre at Ste. Anne's Hospital. This committee has visited that centre more than once and has seen the wonderful work they are doing.

I read into what you are saying that Ste. Anne's hospital will become a centre of excellence. There are clinics all around. If you come from Montreal or the Greater Montreal Area, you can get day service and beds in the hospital, but presumably the clinics will not provide that same kind of service. They will promote counselling, and so on. I am thinking in terms of someone needing a stabilization bed, someone who may have been found on a park bench or arrested for doing something. If they were at Ste. Anne's hospital, they would be properly cared for, but the clinics would not be set up for this. How will they handle this?

Ms. Tining: The clinics work with provincial and regional health authorities. Across the country, these clinics are operated through contract with professionals in the health care services. They all are aligning partnerships with the regional and provincial health services to provide what is required. They have a network.

Senator Day: If a young veteran needs the services, do you have sufficient beds at Ste. Anne's Hospital to provide in- house care? Do you have a Ronald McDonald-type house next door to allow them to stay there but to carry on life on an out-patient basis? Is that there or in the works?

Ms. Tining: We have a certain number of beds available which are not totally used.

Senator Day: Are these full-time beds?

Ms. Tining: Yes. That is something that we are looking into in our partnership with DND. Ste. Anne's Hospital has a major renovation project to undertake, as you probably know.

Senator Day: We were briefed on that.

Ms. Tining: Renovations to the hospital will be finished in 2009.

We have realized that veterans, or young members of the Canadian Forces, want to get the service close to home because their home is where they have their community support and family support. We only have one hospital that remains a federal hospital for veterans. The idea that we would be able to provide as many beds nation wide as would be required in Montreal does not fit the reality.

In some rural areas, we will have 10 operational stress injury clinics, with the five of DND. We do not necessarily have operational stress injury clinics in all the rural areas.

We have a pilot project — which is something the department frequently does to find a way around the rules — with Alberta Telehealth where we are evaluating how provincial health care providers can handle operational stress injuries.

The Chair: That is not the one in the shopping centre in Calgary, is it?

Ms. Tining: Yes, it is.

The Chair: We toured that the last time we were out West. It is excellent. The anonymity, apparently, is very helpful.

Senator Day: I am talking about the person who needs constant care for a little while and then can transition into daycare. It seems that can only be offered now for those people in the Greater Montreal Area or people who would have to move there to get that service. I suppose that through communications with the clinic other people will learn how to treat operational stress injuries. This is, in large part, a military-oriented problem, and provincial hospitals, nursing homes, et cetera, are not geared toward this type of problem.

Ms. Tining: We have a number of community and contract beds across the country that have been traditionally used for traditional veterans.

Senator Day: Yes, we are familiar with those and have tried to visit them wherever we are. However, those are not geared for 35-year-old post-traumatic stress disorder patients.

Ms. Tining: That is right.

Senator Day: We will follow up on this issue. We have an interest in it and have plans for visiting. My questions are designed to learn about your thinking and to inform you of our thinking.

The Chair: Are you aware of the work being done by an American facility at White River Junction in Vermont, just south of Montreal? Senator Dallaire brought that centre to our attention and I wonder whether you have had any contact, perhaps through Ste. Anne's Hospital. Apparently they are doing interesting work there, though I do not know the extent or type of it.

Ms. Tining: We could look into it.

The Chair: Perhaps you could find out whether Ste. Anne's Hospital is aware of them or is dealing with them in any way.

Do you monitor the levels of satisfaction of your clients, if I may use that term? If so, are those findings for your use only or are others able to see how you are doing?

Ms. Tining: Veterans Affairs Canada has been doing that for many years. It is now a requirement for almost every federal department to do that as an indication of outcomes. We do it every two to three years, and we are doing it this year. The last survey indicated an 84 per cent satisfaction rate.

I asked whether we only survey veterans who are getting services from us or whether we also survey those who get no services. I was happy to hear that we are surveying both.

The Chair: Is your next survey in 2007 or in 2008?

Ms. Tining: We have just started the survey, so the results will be out in the first few months in 2008.

The Chair: Will you share the results with us in due course?

Ms. Tining: I would be glad to do that.

Senator Nancy Ruth: The civilians that come into these 15 centres are families of veterans. Some of the aid people we send to war zones through CIDA contracts, et cetera, come back with post-traumatic stress disorder. Do they have access to these centres, or do these centres transfer their knowledge, and the research data that I assume they have, to civilian mental health institutions? How do we service government people who are working in war zones on Canada's behalf?

Ms. Tining: We need to do more work on that front because we need to know that they exist, and I am not sure we are reaching them through DND.

Senator Nancy Ruth: You might service them?

Ms. Tining: I would say we might, but we need to do more work. I do not have a good answer to your question. I have not been very good at answering your questions today. I will have to do better next time.

Senator Nancy Ruth: They are questions that are not asked frequently enough.

Ms. Tining: Yes.

The Chair: Thank you for your presence here today. We have benefited greatly from it.

The committee adjourned.