Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs
Issue 1 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Wednesday, November 21, 2007
The Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence met this day at 12:09 p.m., pursuant to rule 88 of the Rules of the Senate of Canada, to organize the activities of the committee.
[English]
Shaila Anwar, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, we have a quorum. As clerk of your committee, it is my duty to preside over the election of chair and I am ready to receive motions to that effect.
Senator Day: I nominate Senator Michael Meighen as chair of this Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs.
Senator Kenny: I move that nominations close.
Ms. Anwar: It moved by the Honourable Senator Day that the Honourable Senator Meighen do take the chair of this committee. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Ms. Anwar: I declare the motion carried.
Senator Meighen, please take the chair.
Senator Michael A. Meighen (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: Thank you very much, colleagues. I appreciate that. It is nice to be back, as Senator Day said.
Senator Kenny: It was on the condition there be no speeches.
The Chair: There will not be any speeches today but I will seize the occasion at a later date to make a few remarks about the role that Senator Day played as chair of the subcommittee and the successful outcome he had on a difficult problem. I think our thanks for his leadership in that regard deserves to be on the record. However, I will save that for a day when we are not as pressed.
The next item on the agenda is the election of deputy chair. Is it permissible for me to move it?
Ms. Anwar: You are to ask for nominations.
The Chair: I will ask for nominations but I would like to move it, if I may.
Senator Kenny: Why do you not move something, Mr. Chair?
The Chair: I think I will. The clerk said I must ask for nominations. I move that Senator Day be appointed deputy chair of this subcommittee.
Senator Kenny: Can we vote on this?
The Chair: If there are no other nominations, perhaps you would like to move nominations closed?
Senator Kenny: I move nominations closed.
The Chair: There being no other nominations, all those in favour of Senator Day?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Here is Senator Dallaire. Congratulations, Senator Day.
Senator Day: Thank you very much for your confidence. I appreciate that very much.
The Chair: I am sure Senator Dallaire, had he voted, would have concurred.
We need a motion with respect to decisions regarding agenda witnesses and scheduling hearings.
Senator Kenny: I so move.
The Chair: It is moved by Senator Kenny:
That the chair and deputy chair be empowered to make decisions on behalf of the subcommittee with respect to its agenda, to invite witnesses and to schedule hearings.
Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Is there a motion to print the subcommittee's proceedings?
Senator Kenny: I so move.
The Chair: It is moved by the Honourable Senator Kenny that:
The subcommittee print its proceedings; and
That the chair be authorized to set the number to meet demand.
Are you in favour of that, Senator Day?
Senator Day: I am.
The Chair: I assume you are not a member of our committee, Senator Dallaire? If I had the power to make him a member I would.
Senator Dallaire: One day if we make this a committee rather than a subcommittee, I would like to be.
The Chair: That would be another day.
We need authorization to hold meetings and to print evidence when quorum is not present.
Senator Kenny: So moved.
The Chair: Thank you, Senator Kenny. You will be everywhere in the minutes. We must put Senator Day in here soon.
It is moved by Honourable Senator Kenny:
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 subcommittee from both the government and the opposition be present.
Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: We need a motion in respect to research staff.
Senator Day: I so move.
The Chair: Senator Day moves:
That the subcommittee ask the Library of Parliament to assign an analyst to the subcommittee; and
That the chair and the deputy chair be authorized to retain the services of such experts as may be required by the work of the subcommittee; and
That the chair, on behalf of the subcommittee, direct the research staff in preparation of studies, analyses, summaries and draft reports.
Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Mr. Cox, is that you? Welcome back. It is great to have you.
An Hon. Senator: Do we have a choice?
The Chair: No, but I would not want a choice; there is no one better than Jim Cox, analyst from the Library of Parliament, who is known to us all. We will have to call him Dr. Cox soon.
Senator Dallaire: Well done, Mr. Cox.
The Chair: We need authority to commit funds and certify accounts.
Senator Day: Yes.
The Chair: It is moved by the Honourable Senator Day:
That, pursuant to Section 32 of the Financial Administration Act, and Section 7, Chapter 3.06 of the Senate Administrative Rules, authority to commit funds be conferred individually on the chair, the deputy chair and the clerk of the subcommittee; and
That pursuant to section 34 of the Financial Administration Act, and Section 8, Chapter 3.06 of the Senate Administrative Rules, authority for certifying accounts payable by the subcommittee be conferred individually on the chair, the deputy chair and the clerk of the subcommittee.
Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you. May I have a motion with respect to travel, please?
Senator Kenny: I so move.
The Chair: Thank you. Welcome, Senator Nancy Ruth. It is moved by the Senator Kenny:
That the subcommittee empower the chair and the deputy chair to designate, as required, one or more members of the subcommittee and/or such staff as may be necessary to travel on assignment on behalf of the subcommittee.
Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: We need a motion designating members travelling on subcommittee business. Perhaps you would like to move that, Senator Nancy Ruth?
Senator Nancy Ruth: Yes.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
It is moved by the Honourable Senator Nancy Ruth:
That the chair and deputy chair be authorized to:
1. determine whether any member of the subcommittee is on ``official business'' for the purposes of 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 subcommittee to be on ``official business'' if that member is:
(a) attending an event or meeting related to the work of the subcommittee; or
(b) making a presentation related to the work of the subcommittee.
Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Moving on, item 10 is the travelling and living expenses of witnesses. Is there a motion in this regard?
Senator Day: Are we following the rules?
The Chair: Yes.
Senator Day: We should follow the rules.
The Chair: Senator Day moves:
That, pursuant to the Senate guidelines for witness expenses, the subcommittee 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.
Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: May I have a motion with respect to electronic media coverage of public meetings?
Senator Kenny: I so move.
The Chair: Thank you. Senator Kenny has moved:
That the chair and deputy chair be empowered to allow, at their discretion, coverage by electronic media of the subcommittee's public proceedings with the least possible disruption of its hearings.
Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Honourable senators, the time slot of 12 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. means that we will probably get under way with witnesses at 12:15 p.m. We will have about an hour and 10 minutes for witnesses.
Is there other business?
Senator Kenny: I have one thought on that item. We normally met in the Victoria Building. It would probably save time if we met here, Mr. Chair. The price for that is television.
The Chair: If we meet in the Victoria Building?
Senator Kenny: If we meet in the Victoria Building, we have television. If we meet here in Centre Block, it is easier for people. We can hear the bells and people from caucus down the hall. However, if we go to the Victoria Building, we must put on coats, et cetera.
The Chair: Would colleagues like to make a choice?
Senator Nancy Ruth: I prefer to be here.
The Chair: For reasons of time, Senator Nancy Ruth?
Senator Nancy Ruth: Yes, partially: If people want to know what is happening, they can read transcripts; they do not need to see it on television.
Senator Kenny: I have a slightly different view. I think that meetings that are organizational or ones that the chair and the deputy chair deem to be routine meetings, Centre Block would be the best place to do it. However, if we have a witness —
The Chair: Such as a minister?
Senator Kenny: Yes, or it can be any witness. It is the difference between having the funny people you see sitting around on the wall, and no one knowing what is going on. I do not believe that people read transcripts of committees. When it is televised on CPAC, the audience varies between 30,000 and 70,000. I think the message that senators are working on issues that relate to veterans is an important one to get out to the public. Television is really our only venue to do it. The media will never come to a routine meeting.
I leave it in the hands of the chair and the deputy chair to determine where they want to have the meeting, depending on the witness.
The Chair: Thank you, Senator Kenny. Welcome, Senator Banks.
Senator Banks: Thank you. Sorry I am late.
The Chair: I think all our members are now present.
Ms. Anwar: Senator Dallaire would like to make a comment.
The Chair: Certainly. I will pass to you, Senator Dallaire, once I bring Senator Banks up to date as to what we have done.
We completed the organizational motions. We are now discussing the site of our meetings, the choice being here or in the Victoria Building. In the Victoria Building, of course, television is available.
Senator Nancy Ruth has indicated that her preference is to remain here because of the ease of access; it gives us more time for our deliberations. Senator Kenny then made the point that television is important to getting our message out and that he would be happy to leave it to the discretion of the chair and the deputy chair to decide when the meeting was of some interest to the public at large, when we tend to opt for the Victoria Building. When the meeting is more routine, we come here.
I do not know how you or Senator Day feels about this item, and I will ask Senator Dallaire for his opinion too. I will go to the members first.
Senator Banks: We should show that the good work done by Senate committees is to the benefit of the Senate at every opportunity. However, determining which committees are televised is made on the basis of priority access to the available television-affected sites. It is not entirely in our hands to decide. I am always in favour of the working committees being seen.
Senator Day: Senator Kenny makes a good point in saying that we are in national caucus until twelve o'clock, after which we run across for our meeting and then return to the chamber for 1:30 p.m. That requirement reduces our time. I guess there is no option in the time slot of 1.5 hours, which is in reality 1.25 hours. From 12:15 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. is fixed but from time to time we might want to talk to the whips about meeting at a different time that is convenient for everyone. If we meet about something that we believe is of public interest, then we would not have the pressure and we could meet in the Victoria Building. On the issue of being televised, I agree with the expressed sentiment. Many people watch veterans affairs issues, more so than issues of other committees. Many television watchers are interested in the veterans affairs issues.
I would sacrifice the convenience of meeting here to televise meetings on issues of public interest.
Senator Dallaire: I have two things to say. First, if we could sort out routine matters here in this time slot, that would be great. I agree that when we invite witnesses on current issues many people are interested. New generation veterans are also serving members so the subject is pertinent and we should have as much face time in the media as possible. Knowing veterans as I do, I can say that they watch CPAC frequently.
Second, on the timing, which Senator Day and the chair raised, because this is a subcommittee of another committee, I wonder to what extent the committee will make time available to the subcommittee. I think that position is an inflexible one that could be discussed with the chair of the Standing Committee on National Security and Defence. For example, a paper in front of me indicates that the Defence Committee will look at benefits for members of the Canadian Forces, and for veterans of war and peacekeeping missions. That subject might be considered subcommittee work and so you might want to use the time. If we are looking for time, we might negotiate with the Defence Committee. Certainly, I would appreciate that a great deal.
Senator Nancy Ruth: I can live with this compromise. However, one can also use press releases to cover the media. That is fine.
The Chair: We seem to have consensus on to how we proceed. If senators are agreed to leaving it to the chair and deputy chair, we will do our best to satisfy the various concerns.
Senator Day: Should we do the orders of reference? Have they been done?
The Chair: Yes. In the five minutes remaining, does anyone, in particular Senator Kenny and Senator Ruth before they need to leave, want to raise any items that the committee should consider?
Senator Kenny: In the spirit of Senator Dallaire's suggestion of cooperation, I ask that the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence take one of the luncheons for a meeting with the ambassador from Afghanistan before the Defence Committee travels to Afghanistan, which will be in December, subject to availability and those kinds of things.
The Chair: Does anyone have a comment? We will do our best to accommodate you, Senator Kenny.
Senator Dallaire: I want to be invited to that lunch.
Senator Nancy Ruth: Do we meet every Wednesday?
The Chair: We have a time slot available to us each Wednesday.
Senator Nancy Ruth: I thought the committee met from time to time only.
The Chair: It has not been every Wednesday in the past, but Senator Day can speak to that.
Senator Day: We met fairly regularly because we were studying a major issue.
Senator Nancy Ruth: It cannot be changed.
The Chair: It could be.
Senator Nancy Ruth: Are we done?
The Chair: Please feel free to leave. It will not destroy quorum. Others might have topics that they wish the committee to consider.
Senator Kenny: You might want to talk about some of the issues for consideration over the coming years. For example, it has been some time since this subcommittee has visited the veterans' hospital. Some consideration should be made to take a look at which ones we have visited and which ones still require some attention. That role is an important ongoing one for the committee. I do not know whether that suggestion meets with members' approval but the issue should be considered.
Since we are in a new session of Parliament, there should be an effort to contact the constituents, if you will, of this committee and re-form some of the bonds that existed in the past with veterans' organizations. In that way, they will know that the committee is back in business and we can acquaint ourselves with their concerns. Obviously, hearing from the minister at some time would be of interest. It has been a long time since we visited Charlottetown, where we had a constructive meeting with the deputy minister of the day. He took us through the operations and challenges he faced back then. In particular, I found it most interesting to hear about the demographics of the veteran population over the coming years.
It would be useful to have a perspective on whether Afghanistan is changing the statistics in any fashion; whether the numbers of wounded and those that have experienced injuries of different types are changing; and do we have the resources to meet those changes?
I also think it would be useful to review things such as the procedures that are in place to deal with the bereaved. Do we have the capacity to deal with the bereaved and is there an ongoing evaluation of that? I know that the Americans, who had far more problems to deal with than we have, found that they ran out of resources sooner than they thought and that the families of the bereaved were not properly cared for.
We also know that there is a difference in Canada between how reservists and the regular forces are dealt with. The problems and challenges that reserve regiments have in staying connected are worthy of this committee's attention. Those are my thoughts in no particular order; they are simply a menu of things that might be of interest.
Senator Dallaire: I hope not to be repetitive, but there are a few areas of interest. One is the Operational Stress Injury Support System, OSSIS. We had spoken at the previous session that we would have the leaders of that element come in and give us a feel of how they are supported across the country. They are on the front line with the new generation of injured forces.
It will be a year plus that the New Veterans Charter has been in effect, and we have given a waiver to the department because they have been up to their ears trying to implement it. However, now they have enough months of implementation behind them to give us some of the areas they are having problems with and, in particular, some of the feedback they have received.
To that avail, they created two advisory boards. One is for critical casualties and it has people such as Ms. Richard and a few others. Then, they have a more general advisory board. It would be of interest to find out more about that animal and how it plans to influence the exercise.
There is the National Center for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, PTSD, in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Centre. Its headquarters is in White River Junction, Vermont. As an example, we could visit that clinic and be briefed by them; they are reeling under the weight of this task. Dr. Matthew Friedman is the head of that center. He is the person I contacted to help us build our program, and he is still there.
Senator Downe wanted us to look at the Agent Orange result. It apparently seemed to be limited in the compensation versus the whole time, but I will let him come back to you with that one.
The other one is the family support centres on the bases. They are handling veterans that are still serving — a lot of their families. How much interface is going on between Veterans Affairs Canada, VAC, the base medical sides and the family support centres? We might find gaps that are not clear.
My last one — and thank you for letting me speak on this — is twofold. One is the reserves, and I come in with Senator Kenny. The reserve individual as a veteran is a completely different animal, and there has been no real dissecting of that problematic issue within their communities and social structures.
I will reinforce that the militia regiments have no instrument to follow up this problem. The regular force regiments do not necessarily do it because there is the whole base and everything else; but a reserve regiment out in Matane has nothing else and those regiments are cradle-to-grave reserve regiments — naval reserve and so on. It is interesting that we have given no thought to how a reserve unit would handle modern day veterans.
In the old days, they went to the Canadian Legion or to the mess. Well, the messes are not working like they used to, nor are the legions necessarily, so there is no historic system, which is interesting.
Senator Kenny: They also run out of paid hours.
Senator Dallaire: Yes, man days, but there has been no allotment for that.
The last one is the hospital at Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue. I met with the deputy minister and the assistant deputy ministers on creating a PTSD centre. I hate the term ``centre;'' it would be more of an institute. With the rebuilding there, they will go from maybe five beds to 20 beds; they will do research, education of clinicians around the country, run symposia and also do jobs.
That might be a problem. If we see what the Americans are doing, it would be interesting to bring that background back to Sainte-Anne, which says it is the centre of it all.
The Chair: They say they are doing it.
Senator Dallaire: Are they really building something that is Canadian to meet our psychological needs and so on, or are they hoping to?
The Chair: How are they getting the resources?
Senator Dallaire: That can be a specific project within VAC. To link to that, the centre is moving from five to 10 clinics now, and will move to 15 clinics later. However, the clinics do not have dedicated beds, nor do they have a dedicated military person who is a non-clinician that knows the jargon. Although they want to provide the communications, some of them do not even know what the acronyms are.
They have not even been hiring new generation veterans for a half day per week, not to dissect the file but to help explain to the clinician what the culture is. There might be value in taking another look. That issue comes from less than a year ago. I was talking to them and I have seen nothing on it. These points are a few of them.
The Chair: That is helpful.
Senator Kenny: Will it be the 25-cent fine plan for the acronyms?
Senator Dallaire: What is that?
Senator Kenny: We fine people 25 cents for every acronym.
Senator Dallaire: That is one way to shut me up.
Senator Banks: I have two things. I gave a copy of one of them to Senator Day; it relates to a proposal for delivery of medical services to serving personnel. I will give it to you and you can decide whether to bring it forward.
The second is a subject that deals with one person in particular, but this committee has had success in dealing with pension matters having to do with one person because of the residual effect to everyone else.
This case dates back to the Second World War when the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan, BCATP, was in place. I did not know this, but it was suggested to many of the instructors who had been originally in the Royal Canadian Air Force, RCAF, and were flying instructors, that they take leave without pay and work for the local flying schools that provided the basic instruction for these pilots. When that program was over they reverted back to the forces.
This particular gentleman, Don McLeod, who is now 91 years old, did that. He enlisted in the RCAF and was a flight instructor. It was suggested to him he should take leave without pay, which was granted within 24 hours, and he continued in the same job he was in, teaching basic flying instruction at the central Manitoba flying school for 790 days. Then he went back into the service when that process was over.
So he taught under the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan a total of 1,950 days, of which 350 count as active service duty, which is 15 days short of the minimum of 365 days for him to be entitled to a pension for active service during the Second World War. He is being refused that.
There were about 5,000 such instructors, many of whom were members of the Royal Canadian Air Force, as it was known then. They were seconded, in effect, to the local flying schools, leave without pay, paid by the government to continue doing exactly the same job, with the same pay. Then, they came back into the forces after the BCATF stopped.
That treatment is clearly not right. If we were able to fix this situation by using the influence you have already exerted in other respects, we might also fix others of those 5,000 who have found themselves short by two weeks from active service.
The Chair: Short by two weeks because of an arbitrary attributing of time?
Senator Banks: Of the 1,950 days that he actually worked, only 350 of them were days in which he was an active member of the RCAF. The rest of the time he was on leave without pay in the RCAF working for a central Manitoba flying school, which was contracted to do training.
The Chair: No credit for that service was awarded?
Senator Banks: He received no credit for active service during that time. He is 15 days short of being entitled to a pension. That situation does not seem right.
The Chair: It clearly does not. It sounds as if we should try to act quickly on that matter.
Senator Banks: He is 91 years old.
The Chair: Thank you, Senator Banks. That was helpful.
Senator Day: I will go over these items quickly. I agree that all of them are good ideas. We will make a list and decide which ones are the priorities for us.
You will recall that about six months ago there was media attention in the United States that the hospitals for American injured soldiers were not adequate. They did not have the right kinds of equipment or services. I think we should be briefed on what specifically the problems were, and then determine whether we have similar problems here.
That suggestion goes along with what Senator Kenny talked about. We should follow the implementation of the New Veterans Charter. We should have an update on that implementation.
War grave sites and memorials are always of interest to me. There was a program for which the current Harper government said initially there was no money available to communities for memorials and cenotaphs. Then they changed their mind and said some money is available. I would like to know how that is going. Is it arbitrary? Is it objective?
Senator Banks: Are you talking about maintaining memorials?
Senator Day: Yes, or to fix them up.
Senator Banks: We raised that at one point. It was one of Senator Atkins' concerns.
Senator Day: We should meet with the Veterans Ombudsman and find out his game plan, where he is going and what kind of staffing he has.
The most calls we receive in my office are for veterans or veterans' spouses who want to be on some sort of pension program or the Veterans Independence Program, VIP. A lady had survived her husband, who was very independent. She needs help but cannot have the pension because he was not on it. Those gaps exist. I think we should look at those gaps.
There is a new Deputy Minister of Veterans Affairs in Charlottetown. We should take another trip and meet that person to find out what is going on. I think it is important for her to know who we are. We need to let them know what we are about.
I receive a number of calls with respect to medals and awards. We receive a lot of calls from veterans who did not serve long enough, or there are suggestions that a medal be awarded to prisoners of war. It would be nice to receive a briefing on those kinds of things to ensure that any complaints of gaps in awards and medals are dealt with objectively by a committee somewhere. I have never had a full briefing on that subject.
The Chair: Not to mention foreign awards given to Canadians.
Senator Kenny: I wrote to the Prime Minister about three months ago essentially complaining that we are giving medals and awards right and that we should have a bigger ceremony than we have at Rideau Hall.
Also, I think we are being stingy with the Valour Awards. I think someone needs to look at the criteria and the process for awarding them. I think the award has a salutary effect, not only on the forces but on the population as well. Anyone who wins a Valour Award will tell you straight off that they did not do anything unusual to earn it and that their buddy would have done what they did if the buddy had the opportunity.
I do not understand why we are not more generous with our awards. It is obviously a question of judgment, but if other people feel as I do, I think we could weigh in and move the pendulum a bit in that direction.
The Chair: I agree. I think you probably had similar conversations with World War II veterans, in particular, who said that in some other armies all they needed to do was cross the street to receive a medal.
Senator Kenny: You can devalue the medals as well, and I accept that.
The Chair: I heard you clearly. It is a question of balance.
Senator Dallaire: I chaired the Standing Committee on National Security and Defence, and the Directorate of History and Heritage takes care of awarding medals. It has been moved to bring it closer to the office of the Vice-Chief of the Defence Staff. I think that move is a smart one.
For example, my son is off to Sierra Leone for six months, but there is no medal for those who are doing missions all over the place that are national but non-United Nations missions committed to zones of certain risk. I know they are working on them, but it would be interesting for us to look at what their criteria is.
One latent position — not wanting to change it — is we tend to be a bit stingy like the Brits versus too generous like the U.S. After 15 or 16 medals, we start to have a problem.
There is a whole arena of non-UN missions. There are pilots and all sorts of people who take part in them. They have been fiddling with the issue, but it might be good for us to find out what the logic is. I think that approach is most appropriate.
The Chair: Honourable senators, I want some sense of priority of going to Charlottetown. There are a lot of places we can go in terms of visiting hospitals, but the department is located in Charlottetown. We could obtain a lot of information, although maybe not as quickly as by asking the DM and others perhaps to come here from Charlottetown. If that fits into our schedules more readily, would anyone have any objection to going there?
Senator Day: Like we were talking yesterday, we could do everything sitting here and then we could do nothing. There are three or four departments there, and it would be good to talk to those people; not only the new deputy minister, but people on the Veterans Review and Appeal Board and various other teams that would be worth hearing from.
The Chair: I have no objection to going.
Senator Kenny: They are not mutually exclusive.
Senator Day: We could mix it with another trip of the overall committee.
The Chair: Our tradition has been to go at the same time. You were talking about going to Washington in the senior committee sometime in the spring. That might be the time to visit the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, to follow up your suggestion.
Senator Day: While travelling to Afghanistan, as I mentioned, we will also visit the U.S. military hospital in Germany. That is where all our severely wounded soldiers go.
Senator Kenny: We are looking into that item, and it will come back to the committee.
Senator Dallaire: The White River Junction is two and a half hours away. We can bring in a family support centre. Valcartier is another two and a half hours away. We could make a triangular visit.
The Chair: We have settled that problem.
Senator Day: We should visit Collège militaire royal de Saint-Jean that is reopening.
The Chair: You have set quite a table for us. I am glad Mr. Cox has taken copious notes, and we will try to synthesize them. We can obtain information through the deputy minister and the minister about some of these questions. Do colleagues have a sense as to the importance of inviting the minister before us sooner rather than later, or would you rather undertake other matters first and then perhaps have reactions to share with him?
Senator Banks: To be selfish, I would like to get this guy his pension — he is 91 — however you choose to do that.
Senator Day: We should ask Pat Strogan to appear, in his new role as Veterans Ombudsman.
Senator Kenny: The pension thing appeals to me, as well as the idea of touching base with different groups. Then, we could meet with the minister afterwards on the basis of what we have heard for his take on the things we have heard.
The Chair: Why do we not head for Strogan first? We can alert him to our inquiries but let him know the specific item we wish him to speak on. Can you ask him?
Senator Kenny: With Mr. Strogan, I almost feel we should have dinner with him one night, and not necessarily make it a committee meeting.
The Chair: You think we would learn more in an informal setting?
Senator Kenny: Not only that, but we are not stuck with the bells going off up here.
The Chair: The difficulty, of course, is that we are all busy.
Senator Day: Would Monday night be alright, right after the meeting of the National Security and Defence Committee?
Senator Kenny: Having it end late is the problem.
The Chair: It is not easy. We will try to have a witness for the meeting next Wednesday. Would you be agreeable if we try for Mr. Strogan?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: I will ask the clerks to be kind enough to put something down on paper as to when and where we have been regarding the hospitals.
Senator Kenny: How do we come to grips with the 91-year-old? Is there a file?
Senator Banks: There is a letter from Ted Barris, who used to be a writer on my television show. He has written books including Behind the Glory — Canada's Role in the Allied Air War about the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan. He sent me this copy of the letter he received from this chap's son. That is it.
Senator Kenny: We do not have a dossier. My question is —
The Chair: The clerk has pointed out we need a draft agenda and budget, and so it may be two weeks before Mr. Strogan appears.
Senator Kenny: Can we obtain emergency funding to do it? If the budget was circulated ahead of time, it would be a five-minute item.
The Chair: We will try to do that.
Senator Kenny: I do not think that item is incompatible with Mr. Strogan's appearance. I was simply asking how you visualize proceeding with the file of the 91-year-old; establishing the facts and putting it in the situation where we can then address it.
Senator Banks: I have given the contact information to Mr. Cox, and I suggest that either the chair or the clerk may need to obtain the materials we need to pursue it formally. This letter merely sets out the things I have described to you. I am sure there are records, and we might want to have them.
Senator Kenny: It seems to me this item should be wrapped up before Christmas.
The Chair: Obviously, if it forms part of his ongoing work, it is not likely to come to a happy resolution in that time frame. It will take publicity or PR.
Senator Banks: Or pressure from this committee on the minister.
The Chair: We need the facts.
Senator Kenny: We need to satisfy ourselves that the facts are correct, and it would be nice if we could do that in one hearing.
The Chair: I do not have the benefit of the letter, but who would give us the facts other than the individual concerned?
Senator Banks: If you will tell me what you need, I will undertake to obtain it. I do not know what you need because I am new to this. I can write this guy and say, ``Send me everything you have in respect of records and discharge information.''
Senator Kenny: Perhaps it would expedite things if, instead of doing that, we said our objective is to try to clear this up before we rise for Christmas and leave it up to you and the staff to figure out the right way to go about it.
The Chair: Maybe Mr. Strogan has an investigation under way already but I doubt it. It does not appear from this quick look that they have been in touch with him.
Is there any other business to come before us? We will meet next Wednesday at the same time, same place probably, rather than in the Victoria Building.
Senator Day: Can we send a note to Senator Atkins telling him the committee had its organizing meeting, we missed him and we look forward to his return?
The Chair: I gather that Senator Atkins has not been appointed to the committee?
Senator Kenny: He has been replaced by Senator Mitchell and not named to this subcommittee.
The Chair: It could well be that when he comes back he would be?
Senator Kenny: Yes: We do not anticipate him back before February at best.
The Chair: It will take some time. I will express those thoughts, on behalf of the committee. Since we are on the public record, on my own behalf and on behalf of all members of the committee, I thank Senator Day for his excellent service and congratulate him on the success he had in resolving the difficult problem of the Bomber Command and the Canadian War Museum.
Senator Day: We were a team. We had good hearings and questions on this, and we negotiated behind the scenes; but the whole team was put together by you, Mr. Chairman, and we appreciate the work you did before you had to step down for a short while, and we are glad that you are back.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Senator Day, I appreciate that.
Senator Dallaire: We had divergent points of view, but the winning point was successful. Well done.
The Chair: There being no further business, meeting adjourned.
The committee adjourned.