Proceedings of the Subcommittee on
Veterans Affairs
Issue 1 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Wednesday, May 5, 2004
The Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence met this day at 12:10 p.m. to continue its study on veterans' services and benefits, commemorative activities and charter.
Senator Michael A. Meighen (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: We will begin with a few motions, which are required to make the committee functional.
I would ask for a motion that the committee print its proceedings; and that the Chair be authorized to set the number to meet demand.
Senator Atkins: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
May I next have a motion that, pursuant to rule 89, the Chair be authorized to hold meetings, to receive and authorize the printing of the evidence when quorum is not present, provided that a member of the committee from both the government and the opposition be present?
Senator Banks: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Next I would ask for a motion that the committee ask the Library of Parliament to assign research staff to the committee; that the Chair be authorized to seek authority from the Senate to engage the services of such counsel and technical, clerical and other personnel as may be necessary for the purpose of the committee's examination and consideration of such bills, subject-matters of bills, and estimates as are referred to it; that the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to retain the services of such experts as may be required by the work of the committee; and that the Chair, on behalf of the committee, direct the research staff in the preparation of studies, analyses, summaries and draft reports.
Senator Atkins: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
I would now ask for a motion that the committee empower the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure to designate, as required, one or more members of the committee and/or such staff as may be necessary to travel on assignment on behalf of the committee.
Senator Banks: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Next, may we have a motion that the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to:
1) determine whether any member of the committee is on official business for the purposes of the paragraph 8(3)(a) of the Senators Attendance Policy published in the Journals of the Senate on Wednesday, June 3, 1998; and
2) consider any member of the committee to be on official business if that member is: (a) attending a function, event or meeting related to the work of the committee; or (b) making a presentation related to the work of the committee.
Senator Atkins: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
I would also ask for a motion that, pursuant to the Senate guidelines for witness expenses, the committee may reimburse reasonable travelling and living expenses for one witness from any one organization and payment will take place upon application, but that the Chair be authorized to approve expenses for a second witness should there be exceptional circumstances.
Senator Banks: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
The Chairman: Honourable senators, I open this meeting of our Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs by introducing myself: I am Michael Meighen, from Ontario. With me are Senator Norm Atkins, from Ontario, and Senator Tommy Banks, from Alberta.
We are pursuing our work on the study of veterans' services and benefits, commemorative activities and the Veterans' Charter.
I am pleased to welcome Peter Neary, Chair of the Canadian Forces Advisory Council of Veterans Affairs Canada.
Mr. Neary is the author of a report, which has been distributed to you, that deals with the recognition of a veterans' charter and the treatment of veterans, principally those in the post-Korean War era.
I should also like to recognize the presence of Senator Michael Forrestall, who has been a representative of the Dartmouth-Halifax area for many years both in the House of Commons and in the Senate. Senator Forrestall is Deputy Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence.
Mr. Neary, please proceed with your presentation.
Mr. Peter Neary, Chair, Veterans Affairs Canada — Canadian Forces Advisory Council: Thank you very much, Senator Meighen.
Honourable senators, it is a privilege to appear before you today to discuss the need for an updated Veterans Charter in Canada, an issue covered by your current order of reference and one which has engaged the close attention of the Veterans Affairs Canada — Canadian Forces Advisory Council over the past year. In March, we publicly released three documents that directly address this important issue.
Before I speak to our findings, it may be helpful if I offer some background on the council that I chair and on the creation of our documents.
The Veterans Affairs Canada — Canadian Forces Advisory Council was established by Veterans Affairs Canada in July 2000 to offer expert, arms-length advice, within the scope of that department's mandate, on how to address challenges facing members and veterans of the Canadian Forces and their families. The advisory council has been meeting twice yearly in pursuit of that objective.
During its October 2002 meeting, the council concluded that, despite numerous improvements in the range of services and benefits now available to these very deserving Canadians, the time had come for comprehensive reform. In order to place the case for renewal squarely on the public agenda, the council spent the last 18 months preparing three documents: "Honouring Canada's Commitment: Opportunity with Security for Canadian Forces Veterans and Their Families in the 21st Century;'' an executive summary of that discussion paper; and a companion reference paper, "The Origins and Evolution of Veterans Benefits in Canada, 1914-2004.'' Copies of all three documents have been made available to your committee, and I have them with me.
Our original purpose was to educate the public on the current and future needs of Canadian Forces veterans and their families, and to frame public policy debate in the country. I believe that the resulting documents make a compelling case for a new version of the Veterans Charter for Canada's postwar veterans and their families, one inspired by the enormously successful version that re-established our Second World War and Korean War veterans and their families, but tailored to modern realities.
As our reports show, over the past six years, a growing weight of evidence supports a new approach to veterans programs, including recent contributions from your subcommittee: the 2002 report, "Fixing the Canadian Forces' Method of Dealing with Death or Dismemberment'' and last year's report, "Occupational Stress Injuries: The Need for Understanding.'' What does the accumulated research show? Let me share some highlights.
The number of Canadian Forces veterans is significant. In 2003, there were about 411,000 Canadian Forces veterans in Canada, that is, people who have been released from the Canadian Forces since the Korean War demobilization 50 years ago. Their number is augmented by about 5,000 releasing members of the regular and reserve forces each year. You may be surprised to know that, numerically, our Canadian Forces veteran population eclipses that of our war-era veterans, which, in 2003, stood at about 309,000.
According to Veterans Affairs Canada research, from 20 to 30 per cent of Canadian Forces veterans have multiple physical or psychological challenges that create barriers to their successful re-establishment. Eighty-three per cent of Veterans Affairs Canadian Forces clients report pain that interferes with daily living compared to 7 per cent among citizens at large. Twenty-eight per cent suffer from major depression compared to 5 per cent in the general population. Fifteen per cent exhibit symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, and many of their families say they need help coping with how this affects home life.
Those who leave the Canadian Forces often have trouble finding jobs. According to Defence statistics, 49 per cent of those who are medically released, and 37 per cent of all those released from the military over the past five years have attained less than a high school education. Statistics Canada says that the employment rate for such individuals is below 53 per cent. That is worrisome, because over half of those who leave the Canadian Forces each year are under the age of 39, and 80 per cent are under the age of 44. These people want and need jobs.
Canadian Forces veterans' families are hurting. Eight per cent of Veterans Affairs Canada's Canadian Forces veteran clients report an annual income below $20,000. A full quarter of their Canadian Forces clients report yearly incomes between $20,000 and $30,000. It does not take much imagination to visualize what those figures imply.
Many military spouses forego employment because they must care for children while their partner is deployed abroad, or they move from job to job as the family is transferred. These spouses do not gain the workplace seniority or pension equity that many other Canadians enjoy. When their partner's military career suddenly ends through disability, they can be ill-prepared for the role of breadwinner, especially in a world of two-income families, so the whole family suffers.
Some of the distress has nothing to do with economics. When a veteran suffers from a mental health condition, it can have a profound effect on his or her family. One study found that, among Canadian veterans suffering from post- traumatic stress disorder, there is a 70 per cent divorce rate and an equal rate of difficulty in sexual relationships. At least half of these families also report parenting difficulties.
These veterans and their families have complex and sometimes urgent needs, many of which Veterans Affairs cannot respond to with existing tools. Today, the suite of Veterans Affairs benefits has only two main components: Disability pensions for those with service-related injuries, and health care benefits if they can be tied to a pension disability. The once extensive range of other re-establishment programs and benefits administered by Veterans Affairs no longer exists.
Today, many of those who have served Canada with courage and distinction on dangerous U.N., NATO and other missions, are at risk because our country no longer has the re-establishment programs to help them. Many of these veterans have been injured in body and spirit by what we asked them to do in arenas of armed chaos, bloody genocide, natural disaster and civil breakdown. We return them to families that we should help more as they rebuild their lives, pursue deferred dreams or cope with shattered ones. Frankly, we must do more to honour our national responsibility to look after those people who have served and sacrificed in our name.
As a history professor, I cannot help making reference to precedents. As thoughtful lawmakers, I know that precedent is valued by those who serve Canada in this place as well. When our Second World War and Korean War veterans demobilized, Canada offered them what was arguably the most generous veterans' benefit package in the world. It was called the Veterans Charter, and it was framed around the idea of opportunity with security.
Canada provided disability pensions and health care to the injured, and survivors' pensions to the families of those who made the ultimate sacrifice. However, the focus was on getting veterans back into the workforce. There were schemes of vocational rehabilitation, educational upgrading, business start-up loans and a program for those who wanted to farm or fish. There was a program to help veterans buy land and build homes. Veterans were supported while they trained for new jobs or waited for new businesses to prosper; and income support or long-term care was offered to those who were too disabled or too badly affected by the horrors of war to earn a wage or live independently. When the Korean War ended, Canada offered similar support to a new cadre of veterans, because they had similar needs and an equal call on the gratitude of our nation.
Today, most of the programs that helped our Second World War and Korean War veterans successfully return to civilian life have expired, but the government's mandate to provide re-establishment assistance has not. The Department of Veterans Affairs Act assigns that organization a mandate for "the care, treatment, training, or re- establishment in civil life, of any person who has served in the naval, military or air forces...'' and, "the care of the dependents of any such person.'' This is plain language.
A landmark 1998 Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs report led to the important "Quality of Life Initiative,'' which made critical improvements in the conditions of service for Canadian Forces members. Now the government must follow through by addressing, in a way that reflects 21st century conditions, its mandate of care for modern veterans. This is the next logical policy and program step, and it requires determined government action.
In this regard, I was delighted to attend yesterday a news conference at which the Honourable John McCallum, Minister of Veterans Affairs, and the Honourable David Pratt, Minister of National Defence, announced that the government will be undertaking the most fundamental reform of veterans' programs since the wartime Veterans Charter was introduced. This vision for a modern day veterans' charter signals a return to meeting the full Veterans Affairs mandate, a most welcome step. It is excellent news for Canada's veterans and their families. It is equally welcome news for those who now serve, or would like to serve, in the Canadian Forces; and it should be considered good news for Canadian society, too, which will benefit from the successful reintegration of veterans' families into the economic and social fabric of the nation.
Our advisory council has made a number of recommendations about the form this modern day veterans' charter should take. As yesterday's ministerial announcements are translated into draft legislation and new regulations, we will be bringing our professional expertise to bear in considered advice. I would urge the Senate to also use our recommendations as one tool for evaluating those proposals when they reach our nation's chamber of sober second thought.
You have our recommendations before you. I will highlight just a few.
We need to simplify access to existing programs and provide adequate case management services, especially for those who are medically released and often need the most help getting re-established.
Peacekeeping and supporting international security are not benign activities. We have lost 119 Canadian Forces peacekeepers to the cause. Over 500 Canadian Forces members died in Europe while on NATO duties, sobering evidence of the price paid by Canadians during the Cold War. Tragically, many additional careers have been ended and lives altered by duty-related injuries.
In today's military, the risk of physical and psychological injury is high. When the injured leave the forces, they have to navigate a maze of service agencies to find the necessary help. These include Veterans Affairs, National Defence, the Service Income Security Insurance Plan, the Department of Social Development, the Canada Pension Plan disability pension program, a provincial health care system and local social workers. The list of potential service providers is lengthy, the inter-relationship between different programs is complex, and the choices to be made are not always clear. Sometimes, winning benefits from one program results in benefits being clawed back from another. This is administratively cumbersome and gets in the way of best service.
These veterans have unexpectedly lost an income and a career, and are often learning to live with a physical or psychological disability; and their families are also coping with those challenges. They can be unprepared or unable to work their way through a complex landscape of programs while making life-changing decisions. We need to make the system simpler, and we need to offer those veterans a case manager to guide them toward the future.
That future should see them becoming independent and well. The country's main form of assistance to a Canadian Forces member injured in the line of duty today — a Veterans Affairs Canada disability pension — may work against the healthy independence that Canadians value.
A veteran in need usually has to qualify for a disability pension in order to access other veterans programs like health care, home care or long-term care. This takes time, and while the veteran waits for his or her pension to be adjudicated, opportunities for early intervention and assistance are missed. This runs contrary to current knowledge about best practices in rehabilitation and support to families in crisis. The best practice is early intervention.
Our new veterans require a range of re-establishment programs: transition assistance; job-finding help; rehabilitation; retraining; income support; health care, family assistance and so on. We should offer access to these based on a professional needs assessment as part of a well thought out re-establishment plan. This new approach needs to encourage wellness and help veterans to regain independence and dignity as functional citizens.
Our discussion paper outlines 17 principles and processes that should be adhered to in developing a new veterans program. I will mention only five key ones today:
First, the program must once again fulfil the Department of Veterans Affairs re-establishment mandate and its related mandate for remembrance where Canadian Forces veterans are concerned.
Second, the program must complement the ability of the Department of National Defence to recruit, retain and deploy modern combat capable Armed Forces.
Third, the program should acknowledge the contributions made to Veterans Affairs Canada and the Department of National Defence by spouses and families.
Fourth, the program should reflect best practices in modern case management, including continuity of care, client engagement and client self-determination, as endorsed by the federal disability agenda.
Fifth, the program should apply prospectively, with existing services and benefits grandparented as appropriate. The new program should neither diminish existing support to veterans of the First World War, Second World War and Korean War nor preclude updates to those supports as need warrants. Only in this way will Canada honour all of its veterans. This is fundamental.
Finally, our advisory council recommends that the following six priorities be addressed.
First, we urgently need a complete and thorough overhaul of the way the Canadian Forces members and veterans are compensated for injury.
Second, we need the development of a robust program of transition services and benefits. This must be easily accessible, responsive to client needs, timely and flexible.
Third, we need the development of policies that will enhance the support provided to spouses and children, most particularly in the areas of health care and structural economic inequalities.
Fourth, we need the expansion of existing health care benefits to reflect a more comprehensive mental health strategy and new approaches to rehabilitation, retraining and wellness.
Fifth, there should be acknowledgement of the government's duty to accommodate disabled members of the Canadian Forces through an enhanced priority for employment in the public service.
Sixth, there should be the provision of equitable access to funeral and burial benefits for deceased Canadian Forces veterans.
History shows that the best and most important changes to veterans' benefits have been achieved when all of the leading veterans' organizations voice their support for proposed reforms. Veterans' organizations have traditionally been partners of the Government of Canada in making veterans policy. It is critical that this tradition be maintained.
In this context, I am pleased to say that the principles and priorities outlined in the council's documents have been endorsed by the Army, Navy and Air Force Veterans in Canada, the Royal Canadian Legion, the Canadian Association of Veterans in United Nations Peacekeeping, the Canadian Peacekeeping Veterans Association and the Gulf War Veterans Association of Canada. All five organizations and the National Council of Veterans Associations participated in yesterday's news conference announcing a "Vision for a Modern Day Veterans Charter.'' This support is significant and signals that the time is indeed ripe for change.
I urge the Senate to do all that it can to advance this pressing item on our national agenda. In doing so, it would build upon an enviable and long-standing record of service to Canada's veterans and their families.
The Chairman: Thank you. I cannot speak for everyone but I suspect that we all welcome the opportunity to build upon the reputation of our predecessors and to do what we can for veterans.
Before opening the floor to questions I want to share something with you that Mr. Neary gave to me before he began. It is a little booklet that was issued to veterans of World War II entitled, "Back to Civil Life: Prepared to Inform Members of the Armed Forces and Canadians Generally of Steps Taken for Civilian Rehabilitation of Those Who Served.'' It was issued under the authority of the first Minister of Veterans Affairs, the Honourable Ian Mackenzie.
Mr. Neary drew one or two lines to my attention. The following sentence is over the minister's signature: "Canada's rehabilitation belief is that the answer to civil re-establishment is a job, and the answer to a job is fitness and training for that job.''
The paragraph entitled "Object of the Program'' begins, "The object of Canada's plan for the rehabilitation of our Armed Forces is that every man or woman discharged from the Forces shall be in a position to earn a living.'' I do not think much has changed except, perhaps, we have lost sight of these very basic objectives.
Let me pass the booklet around for senators to have a look at and open the floor to questions.
Senator Banks: While Senator Atkins is looking at the booklet, I will start off. Believe it or not I remember that book because some of my uncles brought it home after the war. Of course, there have been other books since then.
You are a historian, Mr. Neary. What went wrong? What possible thinking could have taken place that led us to believe, "We do not have to do that any more''?
Mr. Neary: That is a good question. The re-establishment program for veterans of World War II was a limited-term program. The plan for World War II veterans was that we would, as a country, run a rehabilitation and re- establishment program for roughly 10 years. By the end of that time, everyone who was able would be retrained and back in the workforce and re-established.
That, largely, happened. It was an enormously successful plan. The idea behind that part of the program was "opportunity with security.'' The Government of Canada would give people security while they re-established themselves in the workplace.
Senator Banks: It was dealing with hundreds of thousands of people at a time.
Mr. Neary: We had over 1 million people in uniform during World War II. This was an ambitious and successful program that was designed to get people back to work. The program would then disappear and the Department of Veterans Affairs would become a smaller department. It would deal with people who could not be expected to re- establish, and the families of those who had lost their lives in World War II. It was to become a smaller department.
The process was then continued for Korean War veterans because, not long after World War II, we were involved in the war in Korea. We sent over 27,000 people to Korea, many of whom lost their lives. The program was continued for a short period of time.
The planners of World War II could not have foreseen the Cold War. They could not have foreseen the continuing need. However, there turned out to be a continuing need, and the continuing need became very intense in the 1990s, when Canadian Forces members were sent on many more deployments. The smaller Canadian Forces had to do that. The need for such a program has become very obvious again.
We should not reinvent what we had in the 1940s, but we have needs like we had in the 1940s, and we need re- establishment programs to address those needs.
Veterans Affairs Canada, through much of its post war history after that big burst of re-establishment, tracked the World War II generation, which was appropriate. It did a great job of doing that. It invented wonderful programs for World War II veterans. The Veterans Independence Program, which came into existence in the 1980s, was the principal program.
That department now has a younger clientele again. It is not on the scale that we saw at the end of World War II — you appropriately referred to the numbers — but it is substantial. The department will have a continuing role in relation to that group of people. We need programs like the programs we had at the end of World War II but appropriate to 21st century circumstances.
The department now is running a service and program modernization task force which is paying attention to the principles that I spelled out here today, and which is working to bring forward, as was announced yesterday, a plan for a new veterans' charter, which will do the re-establishment job that we need in 2004.
Senator Banks: I am glad you said it will do that job because members of this committee have been looking forward to this for a long time.
Talk for a moment, if you would, about how confident you are that the five process recommendations and the six specific recommendations that you made will be in this program when we finally see it. Are you comfortable with your input level? Are you convinced that it will be what it needs to be?
Mr. Neary: I am an optimist about what has happened in Canada recently in this regard, personally optimistic. The government put a lot of money into what is called the "Quality of Life Initiative'' in the Canadian Forces. That is an important initiative. It has changed the conditions of service in the Canadian Forces. It was an admirable investment, I believe.
Senator Banks: Is it keeping up?
Mr. Neary: I think it is. I think a good job is being done. This is the next logical policy step. It must be carried forward now into Veterans Affairs Canada. There are many positive signs in that regard. Veterans Affairs Canada and the Department of National Defence have exchanged liaison officers. For a number of years now, they have had a joint steering committee. They are working effectively together, and I have seen evidence of that. This is a good news story in our country, and one that deserves to be heard.
The plans announced yesterday are, so far, ideas, of course, but a lot of work is being done, and I hope that the principles that we brought here today will be available to you and that you will look at them when those plans come forward. You can judge for yourselves whether the plans realize the objectives that I mentioned. We will be doing that as well and crucially, the program will be worked out in cooperation with the traditional partners of the Government of Canada in the making of veterans' policy, namely, our veterans' organizations.
Senator Banks: In respect of post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD, and the pain that you referred to that is, according to your numbers, experienced by 83 per cent of ex-service personnel, I do not remember those numbers in the late forties and early fifties. I do not know whether we diagnose or recognize conditions better now, but we have heard people tell us, senior officers, that they do not believe that PTSD and that kind of pain problem exists to the extent that the establishment now thinks that it does. Are these just old sweats remembering the old days? Has something changed? Are we just better at recognizing the problem or what?
Mr. Neary: Of course, we are 50 or 60 years on from World War II and we do have new knowledge. I think we are very progressive in Canada in our attitudes on this matter.
We have taken some important policy and program steps. I believe this time in Canadian history will be remembered for those steps. I am most supportive of what the Canadian Forces have done in this regard, and I am equally supportive of what the Department of Veterans Affairs is setting out to do in cooperation with the Canadian Forces.
I did not mention, of course, the wonderful centre that those two departments run in Ottawa for disabled and retired members of the forces. It is a wonderful initiative, the kind of initiative that we now have the opportunity to build on in Canada in order to have a program that we will be as proud of as people were in the 1940s of the original Veterans Charter. We have a great opportunity here. It is an opportunity that all Canadians across the country, I believe, should welcome; and it should welcomed across party lines. I think it will be.
Senator Banks: You will find that there are no party lines in this committee.
The Chairman: Just lines of support.
Mr. Neary I heard you say that the advisory council that you chair will be following with interest the proposed legislation that, presumably, will be introduced in the fall to give voice and action to the announcement of yesterday. Does the advisory council have a specific mandate, another task, it is undertaking at this time?
Mr. Neary: No, we offer advice to Veterans Affairs Canada based on our professional knowledge with regard to programs for Canadian Forces veterans and their families. "Their families,'' is a very important phrase because the family situation in the country has changed so much and the program worked out in 2004 in family terms must be quite different from the arrangements that were made at the end of World War II. We have members of our council who have expertise in the family area; and we have members of council who are knowledgeable about PTSD and about disability issues. We are there to offer professional advice.
The veterans associations, of course, as I said in my remarks, are the critical partners of the Government of Canada in the making of policy.
Senator Atkins: I think your organization deserves a great deal of credit for the work it is doing.
Why is it that we always have to try to reinvent the wheel? The book is the evidence.
One of my particular interests is education. I often refer to the veterans rehabilitation program after World War II. It was an incredible program for educating service personnel who were discharged. It gave them a way to re-enter the economy by upgrading their education.
Mr. Neary: Of course.
Senator Atkins: Is it possible, in view of the fact that the statistics show that a lot of the people who serve in the military get their discharge in their late thirties or early forties, to incorporate that kind of program again?
Mr. Neary: There are many opportunities for those who are discharged. The Department of Veterans Affairs brings to this its unique talent, and that is case management. It will be able to help veterans of the Canadian Forces take advantage of all the programs that exist within the Government of Canada, and it will create new programs for them.
Walter Woods, the first deputy minister of the Department of Veterans Affairs, was the man who largely invented and ran the World War II program. He published a book about his experiences called, Rehabilitation (a Combined Operation). What he meant by that was the Department of Veterans Affairs was not created to run all programs for veterans. It was not that kind of department. It would have some programs but it would be a coordinating agent on behalf of veterans within the Government of Canada and bring together the services of government, federal and provincial, and the services of other groups in the country, on behalf of veterans. That coordinating role is still there. It is a very important role, and part of it will be helping veterans to find educational opportunities.
There are already re-establishment programs within the Canadian Forces. The Canadian Forces have been very active in this regard and have a very fine record. What the Department of Veterans Affairs will bring to the table, I believe, is cooperation with the Department of National Defence in case management opportunities that do not now exist. It will be accountable for outcomes. It will have a long-term interest in the veteran.
The Government of Canada did not create one department to do this, it created two: The Department of National Defence and the Department of Veterans Affairs. Veterans Affairs, by the way, will be celebrating its sixtieth anniversary this year. That department that has brought enormous benefits to thousands of Canadians over the years and it has a great opportunity to do that again. We have an opportunity as a country, I believe, in relation to the urgent needs of these veterans, and education will certainly be part of this story.
Senator Atkins: I am curious to know, of those who get a discharge in their late thirties or early forties, how many of them go into the reserves? Do you have any statistics on that?
Mr. Neary: I cannot give you an answer to that question, but it could certainly be found out for you.
Senator Atkins: I would think that would be an opportunity for veterans, unless you have some insight into the fact that most veterans do not want to carry on with military involvement.
Mr. Neary: It is important to understand today, as I know you do, that reservists have come to play a very important part in our military operations. It needs to be well understood across this country that members of the reserves play a very vital role in the missions that we send abroad. We want this modern, renewed Veterans Charter to bring benefits to reservists.
Senator Atkins: That is my next question: Are they being treated fairly?
Mr. Neary: Again, we are in a period in Canada, since the SCONDVA report and the quality of life initiative, where progressive changes are being made in the country. They are not yet complete. Reservists have been part of that. As I said in my presentation, we are not finished. The next logical policy step is to bring the philosophy and the thinking that lies behind the quality of life initiative into the realm of Veterans Affairs. If we do that, we will honour all veterans, including reservists.
Senator Atkins: Do you think they should be treated equally?
Mr. Neary: Their service should be honoured appropriately, absolutely. As a country, we did a very important thing in 2001 that deserves much more attention than it has received in Canada. That is, we extended the status of "veteran'' to every former member of the Canadian Forces who had reached trained status. We had not done that before. Extending that status to that group was a very important development in our country. It is amazing that we did not do it before. It is astonishing that we did not do it, actually.
However, we have done it and now we have to say what that status means. The activities of our council, the project of a modern-day Veterans Charter, is about that.
Senator Atkins: About six years ago, the Veterans Affairs Committee, which was chaired at that time by Senator Phillips, produced a report entitled, "Raising the Bar: Creating a New Standard in Veterans Health Care.'' How far have we advanced in terms of your recommendations vis-à-vis what that report was suggesting at that time?
Mr. Neary: We have achieved much in Canada, especially since the SCONDVA report. Veterans Affairs Canada did a very searching review of veterans' care needs. It had three phases. The first two phases looked at veterans who were community dwelling and in long-term institutions. The third phase, which was completed in 2000, looked at the needs of Canadian Forces veterans. It was a searching inquiry that has led to many productive changes. The announcement yesterday is a culmination of that process.
We have made much progress recently in Canada. We should feel good about that progress, but we should not be complacent. We still have much work to do. In particular, we must bring this philosophy forward into the realm of Veterans Affairs and build this modern-day Veterans Charter.
Senator Atkins: The announcement yesterday is very encouraging, but it is just an announcement. How do we ensure that the government follows through on it?
Mr. Neary: The announcement is backed up by the work of the Service and Program Modernization Task Force, which has been working since last September. It is a very busy and creative group. Its work will be the basis of the changes in regulations and legislation. These things will come before you and the House of Commons. They will be available to veterans' organizations. There will be a lot of input.
Taking the first step is very important, I believe. The first step is always an important step. Canadians have been made aware of the need to do this. In that regard, yesterday's step is very important.
How we now proceed to work it out will evolve. My purpose here today is partly to help you, I hope, have some notions and principles from us that you will be able to have at hand when those regulations come before you.
Senator Atkins: At this moment, we are aiming towards the celebration of the 60th anniversary in Normandy. It is raising the profile of veterans and the legions.
As a communications strategy, what suggestions do you think should be implemented down the road, beyond these celebrations?
Mr. Neary: It is an important anniversary for our country. It will be celebrated. The heroes of that war, who campaigned in Normandy and Italy, came back to Canada and benefited from the programs that are described in the book that Senator Meighen passed around. They produced an amazing generation of Canadians.
Tom Brokaw, who is an anchor on NBC, recently wrote a book entitled, The Greatest Generation. Someone else in the United States wrote a book called When Dreams Came True, which is about the GI bill of rights.
In the 1940s in Canada, we thought we had something better than that. We believed, and I believe we were correct, that we were world leaders, that we had the best program. Now we have the need and the opportunity to renew that. The message for this subject today from these celebrations is that veterans came back and they built, in cooperation with the Government of Canada, and through their own veterans organizations, a better Canada — the kind of Canada that we came to live in and benefit from. I think that is there again in front of us.
It is a big item in the national agenda for this country. It is something we have to do. It is not on the scale of the 1940s, where we had more than 1 million people in uniform. However, by 2013, the number of Canadian Forces veterans who will be clients of Veterans Affairs Canada will climb to something like 58,000. We are talking about a large number of Canadians and we are talking about Canadians who have given special service to this country:
Senator Atkins: When members of the military were discharged in World War II and in Korea, their medical records were somewhat incomplete. In many cases, that was because these veterans just wanted to get out.
Are you satisfied today that the medical records of military personnel being discharged are more complete?
Mr. Neary: I am not an expert on record keeping, but I would hope that, in this age of the computer, records are improving. I can tell you the following, though. One of the initiatives between DND and VAC is a transition program that Veterans Affairs officials have established on bases across the country. They are working with National Defence officials. Their first step was a pilot transition program. They have now made it into a full-fledged program. They are working towards a transition interview with everyone who leaves the Canadian Forces.
This will be an important tool in the administration of the modern-day Veterans Charter that we are talking about here today. Again, we always have work to do on this. We are not there. However, I see very positive evidence in Canada, both from the National Defence side and from the Veterans Affairs side, which I know more about.
Senator Atkins: That is encouraging. However, over the past few years, this committee has heard about military personnel who, at the time of discharge, have felt physically fine but, who down the road, have been faced with disability problems and have had difficulty making claims.
Mr. Neary: It is an interesting and good point. In the case of our World War II program, which is described in the booklet, we did something very sensible in Canada. We did not tell people who came out of the forces that they had to make up their minds right away about what they were going to do. In times of big transition, many individuals are not necessarily in a position to make final decisions.
There were generous time limits in the original Veterans Charter. In the case of the re-establishment credit, which was one of the main forms of assistance given to World War II veterans, they had up to 10 years after leaving the forces to apply for that. We need to be generous in that regard again.
The case-management skills of Veterans Affairs Canada need to be brought to bear on this very important matter. I entirely agree with you on that. In the case of people who are in difficult circumstances, medically released people who have family crises on their hands, who are having to make big decisions and having to find their way through complex networks of programs, time is very important. I personally will be looking for generosity in that regard in this program.
Senator Forrestall: I have a broad general question and then a question on a specific niche — and it may be covered in the work you have been doing leading up to this. I have not seen it in writing, although I have had a number of conversations with people in the office at Charlottetown, going back to the days when I sat on the pensions appeal board.
I know personally and very well one of Canada's leading military persons. I watched him mature in the service, accept increasing responsibility and rise to the top. After serving for over 30 years, he is in now in the hospital and has Alzheimer's disease. In the course of his career, he did virtually everything. He visited theatres of war the day before and the day after actions began, serving elsewhere in between. In his entire career, he never served in a war zone. The one thing he wanted, before he lost the capability to communicate, was to be with his military friends in a military hospital, and he is denied that. We are fortunate in Halifax to have retained an excellent wing. He is not allowed there.
This man took ships to Korea; he participated in the blockade of Cuba at a critical time. It was not a war zone — but he is a veteran in every sense.
Why should that man and his family not have the benefit of access to a military hospital for him? I have used one individual as an example, but there are many in the same situation.
Mr. Neary: I welcome your words, and I wish this veteran and his family every success in life. However, I cannot comment on this case because I do not know the specifics and ours is not a body that deals in particular cases.
Veterans Affairs Canada has also established another council that senators may be interested in knowing about, the Gerontological Advisory Council. The review of veterans' care needs had three phases. Two were devoted to veterans of World War I, World War II and Korea, which are aging populations, and the third phase was devoted to Canadian Forces. As a result of the findings of the first two phases of that review, Veterans Affairs Canada established the Gerontological Advisory Council, and they established this council as a result of phase three.
I believe that issue would be more appropriately considered by our colleagues on the other council.
Senator Forrestall: I appreciate that it is a requirement for eligibility that one has served in an actual war zone, and the mentality of that requirement is what concerns you and others. I hope we can address that.
More generally, are the questions of housing and hygienic issues contemplated in the review that will be undertaken, in the hopes of improving matters?
Mr. Neary: Yes, indeed. I hope the review and the program will be broad, because released persons — and I do not limit that to the medically released — need excellent case management, which will be available through Veterans Affairs Canada. They need to find their way through all the opportunities that exist for them within the programs of the Government of Canada. Veterans Affairs Canada will be in a position to mobilize more general resources across the country on behalf of former members of the Canadian Forces.
I hope we will have programs that cover many needs and which, above all, to come back to what Senator Meighen noted from the booklet at the beginning of our discussion here, will help Canadian Forces veterans lead full lives as Canadians. It is hard to imagine a better way to lead a full life as a Canadian than by having a job.
Senator Forrestall: That is true, but the reality is that there is a block to a man achieving what he wanted if what he wanted is to spend his remaining time among friends.
My last question arises directly from this. Has there been any consideration of a redefinition of the term "veteran?''
Mr. Neary: Yes, senator. We made that change in 2001. We extended the official designation of "veteran'' to everyone who leaves the Canadian Forces who has reached trained status. We have a new generation of veterans. They were always veterans, in reality, but in 2001 the Government of Canada said that they are veterans. That was a wonderfully positive development.
As you will see mentioned in our report, one of the papers that was done for the review of veterans' care needs within Veterans Affairs Canada was given a wonderfully creative title. It was entitled, "Sir, am I a veteran?'' What a question for someone to have to ask. Finally, in 2001, we did the right thing. We said, yes, you are veterans. You have served the country and you are veterans. Rightly, we are addressing what that will mean in reality for the country. We have a great opportunity to do something creative and positive. There is much evidence that we are on the right track to that end.
Senator Forrestall: The Air Force is my niche. I am fully aware of what you are saying, which is why I was leading you to the point of suggesting that we must look at that area, now that we have universalized that definition. The elasticity and the qualifications are present.
For example, how many times have I been on my feet in the past 10 years? The Athabascan Pass — the headland — has now crossed into the war zone. Has the status of the crew changed? Do they have protection? More important, do their families know whether the crew have any protection?
We have been carrying around a great deal of junk mail and an assortment of kits; I hope that is on the table.
Senator Atkins: In your presentation, Mr. Neary, you said that we need to make the system simpler. Could you expand on that comment?
Mr. Neary: Yes. I think that all Canadians can relate to that because we live in a complex world. We all live inside a series of complex government programs, and we all know what it is to navigate our way through programs and opportunities. In the case of Canadian Forces veterans, we are talking about people who often have to do that at difficult moments in their lives. "Simple'' means coordinating, providing case management, providing help and being generous with time. That is what I think "simple'' means.
I see progress in that direction, but we have a way to go yet. I hope that that idea will be clear in the regulations and in the proposed legislation that comes forward.
Senator Atkins: In one of our reports, we suggested the same as you have suggested — that is, that there be a case manager.
Mr. Neary: Yes.
Senator Atkins: You are aware that this committee is in support of that.
Mr. Neary: Yes. It is crucial to success in this area.
Senator Banks: We have not seen first-hand the veterans demobilized at the end of the Second World War or Korea, but it seems to me that veterans these days are better trained, on average, than veterans who came out of the Second World War or even the Korean war. I was about to say excepting infantrymen, but even they, these days, are much more highly trained technologically than infantrymen were trained in the Second World War. Certainly, the personnel of the other services are better trained. It is complicated; even trades are learned now. Perhaps I am mistaken but usual trades are now learned at a much higher proportion in the services than was the case in the Second World War or the Korean War.
Does that have a mitigating effect on employment? I agree with Senator Atkins that the whole point of that book is made in the first sentence. When veterans leave the service, they have to be able to get a job. That would answer everything else.
Mr. Neary: The level of training required is extremely high. The Canadian Forces operates programs that provide education and training opportunities and that help members of the forces transfer their training into civilian lines of work. That is in place but more needs to be done. Some members leave the Canadian Forces without a high level of education, and we know that many have difficulty finding jobs. Often that has to do with the circumstances under which they leave the Canadian Forces.
The Canadian Forces has highly positive programs that need to be carried forward on behalf of those individuals through Veterans Affairs Canada. Going back to something I said earlier, we have taken good steps in Canada. Today, I am talking about the next logical and necessary step. When we take that step, we will have rebuilt the veterans program of the country.
Senator Banks: It does not affect the wisdom of what you are talking about, Dr. Neary, but there is a dichotomy. We have learned about a problem in the Canadian services whereby an electronics technician or a welder can obtain the training in the Canadian services and then discovers that he could make $20,000 per year more in the private sector so he does not re-enlist. It is a two-way street.
Mr. Neary: Of course, it is.
The Chairman: Perhaps I could ask you one question, Mr. Neary, because you clearly have the interests of the Canadian Forces at heart. There was a program in place, which has been gone for a number of years now, that encouraged university students to join the Armed Forces, either the reserves or the regular forces — UNTD or COTC. What are your feelings about those programs in terms of the basic health of our Armed Forces?
Mr. Neary: My era included both of those programs, and I have friends who were in those organizations. These were impressive programs that afforded Canadian students opportunities to find employment during the summer and to meet other Canadian students across the country. Some of the COTC and UNTD people would go to Europe as well. Those programs were an important link between the Canadian Forces and Canadian universities, and they provided many opportunities for students. They helped to build us up as a country through the wonderful personal connections that were made through these programs.
I regret their demise. I teach in a university and it is wonderful these days to see the Canadian Forces making such a good showing on Canadian university campuses. It is too bad we do not have such programs today.
The Chairman: Your advisory council is to the Department of Veterans Affairs Canada.
Mr. Neary: Yes, that is correct.
The Chairman: You have underlined, as we have come to realize on this committee, the close working relationship between the Department of National Defence and the Department of Veterans Affairs. From your observation, what mark would you give the relationship — an A, B, C or F?
Mr. Neary: That really goes to my role as a professor. I would give it a very high mark. Personally, I find the interaction of officials between VAC and DND to be inspiring. They have exchanged liaison officers and, most important, they have formed a steering committee that is active and accomplishes many tasks. The program we are talking about can only work through the cooperation of those two departments. A long time ago, we said that we would have two units of government: a Department of National Defence and Veterans Affairs Canada. They have to work closely together, as they did in the making of the first Veterans Charter. They are working closely together today in the making of this Veterans Charter. We are not there yet, but I am encouraged and optimistic.
The Chairman: Thank you; that is heartening to hear.
I wish to thank our witness, Dr. Peter Neary, for appearing before us today. We appreciate his taking the time to help us to understand the services provided to our veterans.
For our viewers, if you have any questions or comments, please visit our Web site by going to www.sen-sec.ca, where we post witness testimony and confirmed hearing schedules. You may also contact the Clerk of the Committee by calling 1-800-267-7362 for further information or assistance in contacting members of the committee.
The committee adjourned.