THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, October 23, 2024
The Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs met with videoconference this day at 12 p.m. [ET] to examine and report on issues relating to Veterans Affairs, including services and benefits provided, commemorative activities, and the continuing implementation of the Veterans Well-being Act.
Senator David Richards (Deputy Chair) in the chair.
The Deputy Chair: Hello, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the meeting of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs. Before we begin, I would like to ask all senators and other in-person participants to consult the cards on the table for guidelines to prevent audio feedback incidents. Please keep your receivers away from the mics, if you can.
I am Senator David Richards from New Brunswick, and I’m chairing the subcommittee today for Senator Patterson, who has to leave halfway through the meeting. I’m joined by my fellow subcommittee members. I would ask them to introduce themselves.
Senator McNair: John McNair, senator from New Brunswick. Welcome.
Senator M. Deacon: Marty Deacon, Ontario. Thank you.
Senator Yussuff: Hassan Yussuff, Ontario.
Senator Patterson: Rebecca Patterson, Ontario.
The Deputy Chair: Before welcoming today’s witnesses, I would like to provide a content warning for this meeting. Today our subcommittee is studying veterans’ homelessness, a sensitive subject including trauma related to military service. Homelessness and gender-based violence may be discussed, which may be triggering to people in the room with us as well as to those who might be watching and listening to the broadcast.
Mental health support for all Canadians is available by phone and text at 988, and if you are a veteran, you can call 1-800-268-7708 to speak to a mental health professional right now.
Senators and parliamentary employees are also reminded that the Senate Employee and Family Assistance Program is available to them and offers short-term counselling for both personal and work-related concerns, as well as crisis counselling.
I’d now like to welcome to the subcommittee from Veterans’ House Canada, Brigadier-General (Ret’d) Alan Mulawyshyn, Executive Director; and from Homes for Heroes Foundation, on video, we have Brad Field, President and Chief Executive Officer. I’ll give you each five minutes to speak, and then we’ll go to questions. Beginning with you, General, if you could please address us now.
Brigadier-General (Ret’d) Alan Mulawyshyn, Executive Director, Veterans’ House Canada: Thank you, senator. I’m currently with Veterans’ House Canada as the executive director. I have been with them for three years — the last year as the executive director and the two previous years as the deputy executive director; I was transitioning out of the military into this new role.
Prior to that, I served 40 years with the Canadian military as an army engineer officer. Over the past few years, I had the pleasure of serving with Senator Patterson. We have crossed paths many times.
Once I retired, I joined Veterans’ House Canada as I wanted to continue to serve my country and fellow veterans. I was aware of the blight of veteran homelessness, but not the extent. That blew me away. There is no single solution to this national problem, but we are trying to do our part as a wider network of veterans service organizations.
Veterans’ House Canada itself provides permanent, affordable and supportive housing to homeless veterans or those on the brink of homelessness. We currently operate one building in Ottawa, the Andy Carswell Building, which is a 40-unit structure with both indoor and outdoor community common areas. It was built on the former Canadian Forces Base Rockcliffe in Ottawa on land obtained through the Canada Lands Company. We opened our doors in February 2021, about three and a half years ago. Since we’ve opened, we’ve been operating at capacity and with a waiting list.
So far, in those three and a half years, we’ve housed 68 homeless veterans from across the country, not just from Ottawa. We have veterans in the house right now who have come from B.C., Alberta, Quebec and the Maritimes, because there’s just nowhere else to go.
The need, of course, is not just in Ottawa. We are taking the lessons learned from this initial proof-of-concept approach across the country to meet our homeless veterans closer to where they are and where their current support network and circle of care are.
I’m pleased to announce that Edmonton will be our second location. We are currently in the building permit stage and are about to release a request for a proposal for a construction project with the aim of breaking ground early next year. We have already received funding from the City of Edmonton, land from the City of Edmonton and funding from the Province of Alberta. We are currently working for federal funding through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, or CMHC. We’ll also be launching a $6-million private fundraising campaign to make up for the shortfall between the government funding and the actual project costs.
We look forward to hosting you all for a visit and a tour of the Andy Carswell Building next month so that you can get a feel for what we provide and meet some of our veteran tenants who call it home now.
I look forward to discussing some of the policy challenges with you today. One of the biggest challenges that housing providers such as us or Brad with Homes for Heroes Foundation is that housing and homelessness are municipal and provincial priorities while veterans are a federal priority. It is an effort to herd all the cats to bring everybody together to find solutions.
Although veterans are listed as a priority population on the National Housing Strategy, there are no dedicated programs or funds for capital construction, and you can’t solve homelessness without housing. Currently, with no dedicated stream of funding for veteran housing, we are in the same queue as everyone else, and the needs are great across the country.
The recently released Veteran Homelessness Program funding has been wonderful, and we are grateful that we have had a successful application for our building here in Ottawa. However, there are gaps in it, especially with regard to rent subsidies. Again, I’d like to talk about that later. We don’t know if the Veteran Homelessness Program, or VHP, is a “one-and-done” program or if it will be continued in future years. For example, I don’t know if my Edmonton project, which will soon be ready to open, will be eligible for this funding. This makes it difficult to plan.
In addition, once we have provided housing first and wraparound supports, most veterans will need access to primary health care to deal with their physical and mental health challenges. But in order to receive support through Veterans Affairs Canada, you need a doctor’s diagnosis and a signature. However, priority is not given to veterans in our health care system and there is no federally provided support such as veteran-specific regional health hubs, which would be very useful.
There are many challenges, and homelessness is not just a veterans’ problem, but because of the unique nature of veterans — having served their country and that transition from military life to civilian life — it’s exacerbated for veterans.
I’m optimistic that given the number of people out there, the Senate is studying this in a committee and the House of Commons has committed to end veteran homelessness, we can make progress here. I’m looking forward to your questions and discussing this important program. Thank you very much.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you, general. Now we will go to Mr. Brad Field. Could you give your opening statement, please, sir?
Brad Field, President and Chief Executive Officer, Homes for Heroes Foundation: Good day, everyone. It’s still the morning for me. Thank you for the invitation to participate in this discussion today.
Founded in 2018, Homes for Heroes Foundation has a goal of ending veteran homelessness in Canada. Although we provide transitional housing for veterans at risk, we believe our success is due to the fact that we are a program that not only provides a home, but more importantly, full wraparound social services to help in the reintegration of veterans back into civilian life. Homes for Heroes embodies a profound commitment to honouring our nation’s heroes, those who have selflessly served our communities and country.
We currently have three operational tiny home villages in Calgary, Edmonton and Kingston, with Winnipeg, London, Hamilton, Toronto and Halifax on the horizon, with an ultimate goal of having villages in most major centres across Canada. Each village has 15 to 25 tiny homes, resource and activity centre, community gardens and two full-time case workers, all in support of our veteran residents.
A recent McGill University study noted that there were more than 10,000 unhoused veterans in Canada. Sadly, we believe these numbers to be more, as veterans do not self-identify in shelters and traditionally do not use shelters where these counts are being done.
In Canada, many veterans face significant challenges as they transition back to civilian life. These challenges often include financial instability, mental health issues and housing insecurity. Homes For Heroes seeks to address these pressing needs through a comprehensive approach that encompasses not just housing but also community support, education and resources that empower our veterans to rebuild their lives.
We firmly believe that every hero deserves a home, a place where they can feel safe, supported and valued. Housing is a fundamental human right, and we strive to eliminate the barriers that prevent our veterans from accessing stable living situations. By partnering with all three levels of government, other non‑profit organizations and community partners, we work to develop housing solutions tailored to the unique needs of Canadian veterans.
As we look to the future, our vision remains steadfast: To create a Canada where every veteran has access to the safe, affordable, housing and support they need to thrive. We are dedicated to expanding our programs, increasing our reach and advocating for policy changes that benefit our heroes.
In conclusion, as a proud Canadian, I believe we do an adequate job honouring our veterans and servicing their needs, but adequate should not be the bar we set for the men and women who have served this great nation. Homes For Heroes Foundation is devoted to making a tangible difference in the lives of those who have given so much for our safety and freedom. Through housing assistance, educational resources, mental health support and community engagement, we strive to honour their sacrifices and empower them to achieve their fullest potential. It’s conversations like this that can pave the way for a higher bar to be set, and together, we can build a bright future for our heroes and ensure they receive the recognition and support they truly deserve. Thank you.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Field. We’ll go to questions now, and I’ll give the first question to Senator Patterson.
Senator Patterson: Thank you for your presentations and for the work you do. We know that people who are housing insecure are the most invisible Canadians we have. We know that one of our challenges in the veteran community is if they’re invisible, then they are stealth, and that is one of the challenges.
My question is for both of you; General Mulawyshyn, I’ll ask you first. We know the type of veteran we have now is more diverse than in the past, because there are more women, 2SLGBTQ2IA+ community members and visible minorities are serving — they’re even more invisible. How do you adapt your housing so you can take in especially women, and in particular, those who may have suffered from gender-based violence, et cetera? How do you shape your intake for women? Do you have specialized programs? Is there anything else you think you could use to better support these communities as you find them and they start to require assistance?
BGen. Mulawyshyn: Thank you, Senator Patterson. Without a doubt, we’re seeing that diversity. But what we’re seeing from homeless veterans isn’t the CAF from today, it’s the CAF from the 1990s. You don’t usually become homeless as soon as you leave the CAF, it usually takes up to 10 years once you have served and released. We are not seeing the same numbers you’re going to see in about 10 to 15 years when it will reflect today and more of the Afghanistan veterans who are just starting to get to that point in time.
We take an individual approach to each of them as they come in to assess their needs, where they are in their journey, their circle of care and lived experience, and we try to cater around them between group programs, which may cater towards women or specialized groups, or maybe overall reintegrate as a community of veterans to bring everybody together.
It’s something we struggle with a bit to find. I’m looking specifically for support for women veterans right now, as well as Aboriginal veterans. I’m surprised how few Aboriginal veterans that we have housed, maybe because we don’t appeal to them because we don’t do that. Especially as we move to Edmonton, something I’m very interested in exploring is how we can provide better support to these groups.
Senator Patterson: Thank you.
Mr. Field: Thank you. There is no question, and to expand on BGen. Mulawyshyn’s point, we’re obviously open to all genders, minorities, Indigenous groups and LGBTQ2IA+. As an example, 16% of our Canadian Armed Forces are females, but they are two times more likely to be at risk of being homeless. In a recent study, I believe 65% of female veterans reported sexual assault or abuse while they were in the military. There’s no question that we have to take and spend extra time and pay attention.
In the beginning, back in 2018, we had no specific programs arranged for female veterans. What we have learned over the past six years, as female veterans started to come to us looking for support, they would come into our villages and say, “Great, fantastic set up, but what are you going to do to make me feel more secure and safe?” In a way, we were almost re-traumatizing them bringing them back into a barrack-style village set up that was male dominated. We didn’t even understand that at the time. Now, of course, we have extra security measures, extra video doorbells, and they have 24-7 panic buttons that they wear around their neck that dispatch first responders directly to their location. We have created a program out of necessity because we didn’t understand that we were dealing with a different type of scenario and trauma.
There’s no question that each case is individual, and every veteran is on their own journey at their own pace. We work to strive to accommodate all veterans.
Senator Patterson: Thank you. Coming back to that, what do you think needs to be done to be ready for this increasing number of people who don’t fit the stereotype of what a veteran is? What can we do? What are your recommendations? How can we support you in your journey to ensure that you have the accessibility required for all?
BGen. Mulawyshyn: Thank you, senator. It comes down to understanding who is out there and what support could be provided. I find is that it’s very challenging. A lot of people are doing a lot of great things, but we don’t know who they are and how we tap into them. If there were a central repository that perhaps Veterans Affairs Canada could make known and point these out, and perhaps encourage groups to come and join and focus on veterans.
It’s challenging right now, to figure out who is who in the zoo. A lot of people are doing great work there, and it’s how you access them. As you get more niche and specialized, it becomes harder and harder. You start with the basics — health care — but when you start digging it down, it becomes even more challenging. I think a central repository of programs and championing of programs; knowing this is coming up, let’s not wait until it’s there.
Mr. Field: To expand upon BGen. Mulawyshyn’s comments, having that collaboration, quite often in the non-profit sector, not just in servicing veterans, there’s always an innate competition because we’re all striving to gain access to the funding and resources. In this particular case, BGen. Mulawyshyn and I work closely together in servicing our veterans’ needs, but it’s true collaboration. It’s not a competition; it’s collaboration and sharing of resources between agencies is key.
Senator Patterson: Thank you.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you both for the work that you do and for being here. It’s really helpful for us to be listening and inquiring of folks who are on the ground. There are a number of things I heard this morning and that we have heard before that continue to really disturb me, and those are the challenges posed by federal and provincial issues, which you reminded us of again today. There is a disconnect. It is also the fact that we’re working in a 10- to 15-year gap of whom we’re serving, and the numbers — 10,000, which is probably light in number.
Yesterday and today in my region, which is Waterloo, there is a prescribed program they do every two years, and they’re hitting the bricks to see and look. Trained volunteers from the region are looking to see where homeless women are, because they’re not finding them. They know they’re in cars with their children, they’re not wanting to be found, but they finally have a way to get at it. It has taken them five cycles and once they find women, they try to find, in as gentle way as possible, their backgrounds and whether they are connected to the military or not.
All that to say, I’m just trying to think about the start of this. When folks serve, and they’re our heroes, and then they finish serving. While it takes a while to permeate and show itself, are there things that we can be doing before we say goodbye or thank those who serve? In the questions we ask them, is there something in that earlier stage we can be thinking about doing in a better, collective manner than we’re doing now?
It’s just too discouraging. Both of you can respond, please.
Mr. Field: There’s no question that we could be doing a better job. Traditionally in the past, coming out of CAF, there was no transition assistance. We’re in a better position now, but we’re still more reactive rather than proactive, so start the conversations earlier. As serving members are coming up to being discharged from the military, we should be having the conversations earlier.
We quite often get calls from the Transition Centre. We had one quite recently in Ontario. A Transition Centre called and said, “Hey, we’ve got this young gentleman. He served four years. He’s 23 years old. He came to us through foster care, so he has no family. He’s being discharged in the next 30 days, and he has no place to go.” He doesn’t have a home, he doesn’t have a family, and he doesn’t have friends. In that particular case, the conversation worked out well. We were able to house him in our Kingston village.
It is about having those conversations early on about your next steps as you are discharged from the forces. Do you have a place to go? What is your plan? Do you have a job? How are you feeling mental health-wise? Do you need some help and support? We’re doing a better job with that than we were 20, 30 and 40 years ago, but there’s still lots of work to be done.
Senator M. Deacon: Just to come back to the example of the 23-year-old who might have been in foster care, and who we have to help, I don’t know how long ago that was. Do you have a sense of how this young man has done and how he has been able to navigate through this? That’s a real story.
Mr. Field: It is; it’s a fantastic story. He came to us in spring of this year, May or June. He’s been fantastic. He was a shut-in. This young gentleman was arguably picked on in the military, didn’t have a lot of friends while he served. He left the military and came to our village, wouldn’t make eye contact with people, wouldn’t engage in conversation. Basically, he went straight into his home, wouldn’t engage with our case workers. Fast forward five or six months later, he’s doing outings with other veterans now. He’s joining us in the resource centre. He’s working on a plan getting re-educated and retrained for new work. We hope that within 12 to 14 months he’ll successfully transition out of our village into permanent housing and have a job waiting for him, so, yes, definitely a success story.
Senator M. Deacon: Is there a limit on how long these folks can stay when they’re in the tiny homes?
Mr. Field: We are designed as transitional housing. However, that being said, we have an internal guideline of 12 months. That’s just an internal guideline, the goal that we set, but we’ve had veterans in for as little as three or four months, just to get stabilized and so forth, but also for as long as two and a half or three years. Two and a half or three years seems a little bit longer than it should be, but again, each veteran has their own journey at their own pace. But 12 months is our guideline.
BGen. Mulawyshyn: I think Mr. Field hit it on the head, via the transition group and transition units. Most of the homeless veterans, when they got out of the military, it was, “Thanks for coming out. Hand you your ID card in, and there’s the door.”
Now we have the transition group and transition units you go through, and they go through the seven domains of wellness. I’m not an expert, and I think you may have already been briefed on that, but housing is obviously one of them. The whole intent is to get Brad and I to work and anything we can do to prevent, to identify who has the tells, who has the issues, to be able to help them — whether it be housing, jobs or mental health — before the strings are cut. That’s incredibly important.
We’re starting to see some of that, but most of the veterans we’re seeing as tenants were in the military before the transition group existed, because it’s a fairly new organization. I think the Canadian Armed Forces are on the right track, but, truly, the prevention side of it is what we have to focus on. Let’s get them upstream.
Senator M. Deacon: Just to finish up, visiting a site in the U.S., a different budget, different everything, it’s 120 days. They’re committed to the family and the individual coming home to assess all of these pieces that take time, a 120-day commitment. I’m sure a lot more can be done than, “The door is here.”
Thank you very much.
Senator Yussuff: Thank you, witnesses, for being here. First, thank you for what you’re doing in the broader context of how we deal with a long-standing challenge in the country and trying to figure out how we can do better.
I have some questions, and maybe, Alan, I’ll start with you. You’re talking about the certainty of funding of the work you are doing and not knowing whether you’ll have funding to plan ahead. Given this work doesn’t stop, whatever your cycle is for application for renewed funding, how can we capture your frustration, but also articulate that in whatever our recommendations might be to help deal with problems like that? Obviously, we can design differently to ensure the institutions that are providing the service are able to understand they’re going to get funding way ahead of the funding expiring. In the absence of that, you have to start making other arrangements, not knowing if the funding will happen.
Given that you’re on the front lines, you know what you’re doing and you have experience, what could we do, suggest or recommend that might be of help to you in regard to the funding issue?
BGen. Mulawyshyn: You hit the nail on the head. The lifeblood of any charity is funding, to be honest, senator. We live from grant to grant, from funding line to funding line.
In order to provide services, you have to invest. It takes two plus years to build a building, and then you have to bring staff on, run it and bring in the programs. It all costs money, and if you have to rely upon fundraising dollars, it is competitive as well, because there are a lot people and great organizations looking for funding dollars. If we had a dedicated line of funding for operations and capital dedicated to veterans, we could go to cities and other municipalities, and say, “Hey, we’re bringing something to the table, because the federal government is bringing something to the table with dedicated funding.” It’s not us going cap in hand to a municipality or province saying, “Hey, we’re looking after veterans, and this is the problem.” They say, “Veterans aren’t our priority. They’re a federal priority,” so you get this back and forth.
Any dedicated funding that could be made available for veterans that we know will be there, is sustainable, flexible and could be applied for as things advance is key.
I raised the Veteran Homelessness Program as it was a wonderful program. We applied, got funding and so did Mr. Field, but we have no idea whether this is going to be carrying on. As I’m planning future projects, and as Mr. Field plans future projects, we don’t know where that funding is going to come from. Whereas if we had predictable funding at whatever level, we could expand quicker, provide services and bring something to the table as we go to cities and provinces, saying, “Hey, we’re here to help with your homeless veterans, but the federal government is behind us as well.”
Senator Yussuff: The bigger challenge, of course, is trying to identify the veterans who are out there and struggling but don’t necessarily know how to access services. We’ve heard many witnesses who have come here testifying to this reality. I know there’s no easy answer to this problem. Obviously, programs are now better suited to do proper outtake interviews before people leave to try to understand them better. Eventually, things do happen in people’s lives and then they are on the streets at the end of the day.
Is there a better way for us to learn how to help people that fall through the cracks and don’t know they can access services? They should be able to access services given they have served their country. How do we try to find a mechanism? Based on your experience, how do you find them?
BGen. Mulawyshyn: Exactly, it is tough, as Mr. Field mentioned. They do not use shelters, or they don’t stay — they drop in. But there are drop-in programs.
What I like about the City of Ottawa, as a best practice, is it has a single point of contact for veterans in the shelter system. If somebody comes into a shelter and self-identifies as having served, they see the one person. It’s not random. They always go see the same person. She knows who to tap in. She knows we exist. She knows other people exist. I think that’s very valuable. In fact, the Point-In-Time Count, as mentioned by Senator Deacon, is happening today here in Ottawa as well. There is now a question on the form. It doesn’t ask if you are a veteran because there is a connotation to “a veteran,” and you have probably heard this. “Oh, no, I didn’t serve in Afghanistan. I’m not a veteran. I was only a reservist.” No, you’ve served in the Canadian Armed Forces.
So we changed the question to, “Have you ever served?” Then you take away that connotation of “veteran” which could be subjective. You make it simple for them, and then it’s just educating people who are in these organizations, like the shelter system, like the Ottawa registry for affordable housing, to have them identify veterans. Then they can point toward programs or individuals where the veterans can actually get support and be able to move on. That is one education piece, but it starts with identifying the veteran, as you’ve noted, but, again, it requires asking the right question at the right place.
Mr. Field: Again, BGen. Mulawyshyn has hit on a lot of good points; very accurate. I would say we start the conversation at the transition point as the veterans are leaving, as they are being discharged from the Canadian Armed Forces. Let’s have that conversation about where they can access resources.
Again, a lot of the veterans we come across don’t have internet; they don’t have email. In a lot of cases, they don’t have a driver’s licence. There are real stumbling blocks in our system where Veterans Affairs will acknowledge a person’s service to the country. “Yes, he is a veteran,” and so on and so forth. However, at the federal and provincial levels, he or she can’t get a driver’s licence. Now, Veterans Affairs — the federal government — is acknowledging, yes, you are a veteran; you served your country; you are a Canadian citizen; but we have to send you a cheque that you must cash at a payday loan company because you can’t get a bank account without an official government-issued photo ID. So there is this disconnect in the system that needs to be rectified. Again, it starts with conversations, but start them earlier rather than later.
I would also like to touch on the funding model, too. BGen. Mulawyshyn brought up a lot of good points. It’s imperative that we have stable funding, to his point. Our expertise is in how we take care of our veterans. We are becoming experts on grant writing and funding. That’s not where you want us to spend our time. You want us to have the funds available so we can deliver the resources and the services to our veterans.
On average, we spend probably 25% to 35% of each day raising funds, whether it’s through grant applications, talking to jurisdictions or private-sector fundraising. That’s not where you want us spending our time. We want to spend our time on what we are good at, and that’s taking care of our veterans.
Stability in funding can’t be politicized. We talk to politicians all the time who want to discuss a ribbon-cutting ceremony. Everybody wants to stand out front to cut the ribbon on the day we open up a new housing development. The very next day, when the utility bill needs to be paid, they are nowhere to be found. Operational funding is key. Everybody likes structures and buildings because they can put their names on it and stand in front of it, but no one wants to pay the utility bill and the wages the day after, so operational funding is key.
Senator Yussuff: I have a small point on which you elaborated earlier, Mr. Field. If someone is in your services and care, you said there is a maximum 12-month maximum before they have to move on. Moving on means that, in some cases, they need to find permanent housing within your jurisdiction. Do you help them with that effort, or do they have to navigate that all on their own on the occasions when they have to leave your facility to get on with their lives? Maybe you could shed some light on that?
Mr. Field: For sure. For clarity, no one ever has to leave. We have an internal 12-month guideline, but like I said, if there is no place for the veteran to go, they stay in our village until we find them permanent housing. We work with our veterans, whether it’s on mental health issues, addiction issues, job seeking, job training or permanent housing. That’s why BGen. Mulawyshyn and I have this ongoing conversation. We are transitional and he is permanent, so it’s a great partnership. We have a place for our veterans. Once they graduate from our program, they can go into permanent housing, but if it is not with BGen. Mulawyshyn or an organization like his, we are always on the hunt for affordable and permanent housing for our veterans.
Between our national affordable housing crisis and our fundraising, finding permanent housing for our veterans is our biggest challenge. We have no place for our veterans to go after they are done in our program. It’s a real struggle right now.
Senator McNair: I appreciate both of you testifying here today and for the work that you are doing to help veterans in Canada.
As we hear what you are saying about funding and what Senator Yussuff was talking about, we get that dedicated funding is critical. Maybe I’m being naive, but have you had those discussions with Veterans Affairs? Do you think they support that? Are they champions? What is your experience with them?
BGen. Mulawyshyn: Senator McNair, Veterans Affairs is set up the way they are set up, and there are a lot of issues. They don’t do service delivery. They basically provide funding for programs; they are a funding provider to the veterans and not to the organizations. There is some money available from the Veteran and Family Well-being Fund, but it’s not a lot and it’s not guaranteed. It’s not guaranteed that you will get it if you apply for it.
We have done that, and we’ve been somewhat successful, but there are a lot of other great charities out there as well. It is a challenge. We have absolutely talked to Veterans Affairs about this, but there is a structural issue. Housing comes under Infrastructure Canada and the Minister of Housing. VAC, doesn’t have funding for capital housing projects; that’s all within another minister’s purview.
Again, we try to talk to the different ministers. I talked to Minister Fraser about this just over a year ago. We try to make people aware of these silos of excellence in the government and the need to just marry them up. That’s why we were looking forward to, as the mandate letters talked about, the dedicated stream of funding for veterans’ housing. It just hasn’t come to be yet.
Senator McNair: When we hear that 35% of your time is spent on worrying about funding, what comes next in funding the operations? I understand the distinction with Veterans Affairs, but surely they could be a champion for you with the Minister of Housing — or they should be. They must understand the issue.
BGen. Mulawyshyn: I believe they do. Minister Petipas Taylor visited us in her first week in her new job, which was fantastic. I have talked to her a couple of times since, so I believe she does get it, but the proof is in the pudding, right?
Senator McNair: I do want to say that we don’t hear a lot of positive things at this committee. We heard one today, and that was your statistic about 68 veterans being housed. That takes 68 — do the math — off of 10,000-plus. As you said, with the Afghanistan vets, we have not hit that bubble yet; that’s coming. The numbers are going up.
You talked about the housing that you have up and running. The lands came from Canada Lands Company. We had Senator Varone at this committee, and he specifically asked the officials why we are not taking that approach to these excess lands. Senator Varone didn’t like the response he got, which was a list of a whole bunch of reasons why they could not do that.
In Edmonton, you have a project under way. You have not started construction yet, but you do have the lands. Once again, it’s a similar situation. Have you been approaching Canada Lands Company — not just you, but other charities — to grow this across the country?
BGen. Mulawyshyn: Those are fantastic points, and yes to all of those. The Edmonton lands came from the City of Edmonton, not from the federal government. We are working closely with the federal government, Canada Lands Company and CMHC through the Federal Lands Initiative. The problem with the Federal Lands Initiative is that all sorts of lands have been identified as surplus, but Canada Lands’ mandate is to get fair market value for that land. They need another federal government department to give them money or to be funded through the budget process to pay for that land. Right now, we are working with Canada Lands Company and Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, or CMHC, for a piece of land in Toronto through the Federal Lands Initiative, and we are also looking at one in Halifax.
Again, each federal entity has their mandate and their rules, and it takes that cooperative effort to be able to satisfy them all and to line up all the ducks for this to happen. There is absolutely a mechanism for it to happen, but there has to be the will and the funding behind it.
Senator McNair: It is the same central issue that you come back to each time.
BGen. Mulawyshyn: Yes, sir.
Mr. Field: If I could jump in quickly, I would agree with BGen. Mulawyshyn. Most of our lands have come in via municipal and provincial. I have not secured one piece of federal land at this point, although we are working with them for future builds.
As far as finding land, I would say that the easier part of construction is probably getting land at fair market value or a multi-year lease at $1 a year. That’s the easy part. Infrastructure build? Again, it is somewhat easy to raise money through Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation plus private entities and so forth.
It is the operational piece. I am only speaking for myself and not necessarily BGen. Mulawyshyn, but I think he would agree that operational funding the day after is really the struggle point in most cases.
Senator McNair: Thank you.
Senator Yussuff: We had some officials here at the start of our hearings. One of the things still frustrates me, and I’m trying to understand how we can deal with it.
Veterans Affairs Canada gives money to one section to deal with infrastructure, and basically, out of $107 million, $29 million of that is for administration. I’m still scratching my head to understand, if the money is for trying to help veterans in dealing with homelessness, why is such a significant portion going toward administration?
Could Veterans Affairs simply administer funds that are needed to help deal with some of the things, rather than going through another agency to fund what you should be able to access through one portal rather than going to another agency that would have its own infrastructure, and it takes money for its own administration? It seems to me like we are duplicating a process, but also we are taking a lot of money out of the system that does not go to help the people and what we are trying to achieve in the first place.
Given your experience, is there any light you can shed on this to give us an understanding of how we can better make some recommendations to end this duplication and also the wasting of funds, from my perspective? Maybe I am just wrong.
BGen. Mulawyshyn: I’m not exactly sure of the statistics you are quoting, senator, but I think as flat an authority and approval process as you can make it speeds things up and has less duplication. For every layer you add, you are adding on 10%, 15%, or 20%, which then compounds. By the time it comes to the actual providers, such as Mr. Field and myself, all of a sudden, that big announcement for that much money is actually only this much money.
We need to make sure it is coordinated, it is flat, and it is quick and flexible. That would be my four big points there.
Senator Yussuff: Given what you are doing on the front line, I know Veterans Affairs Canada wants to see more of that happening, because it deals with the issue that is supposedly their responsibility. But if they had a way to deal with this without duplicating the efforts within their shop, I assume — I’m trying to understand, because I am still so frustrated with why we have the duplication, and there is another part of an agency that is trying to help you deal with the problem. Of course, money has to be allocated, in fairness, to that other agency for its administration, and I don’t understand why we need the duplication when we could have one place.
If I go to the hospital, and I’m struggling with a problem, I hope they would not send me to another clinic that’s five miles down the road, because I need to get help, and I want to get help right now, because that’s the place where I would go to get help.
BGen. Mulawyshyn: A one-shop stop, to use the term, would be very useful.
Who is coordinating Mr. Field and I? Who is coordinating all the other agencies that are doing great work but are maybe duplicating, or maybe they are not aware of each other? No one is. There is no veteran homelessness strategy within VAC right now. There is no central node that says, “Hey, we are going to corral everybody, and we are going to make sure there is no duplication and everybody is talking to each other.”
We are all self-synchronizing, because everyone wants to do good work, but there is no central coordinating effort to help make sure we are hitting all the marks, dispersed across the country and that funding is properly allocated. We are all doing our own thing, and we will see where we end up.
The Deputy Chair: Mr. Field, could you please comment on this?
Mr. Field: I appreciate that. They are all great comments, and to everybody’s point, it s a single point of contact. If we are talking about veteran homelessness and taking care of Canadian veterans, then let’s keep it within VAC.
When we talk about affordable housing or infrastructure and so forth, from my point of view — and I am going to be selfish — I would love to have a single point of contact at Veterans Affairs where we can call and say, “We need to build another village in said city, and we need funding; here is what we need.”
What goes on behind the scenes, if you have to talk to affordable housing, or you have to talk to Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Canada and so forth — I kind of want to say, selfishly — that’s your problem. We are trying to deal with our veterans. We are trying to take care of our veterans. We need that single point of contact where we are not chasing the money with multiple departments and trying to justify our existence and our ask.
Yes, there is no question that a central point of contact where we could go for funding, resources and support would be a perfect scenario. Right now, it is almost like we have to have a full-time government relations person talking to all the different departments to service our veterans, and it should not be that way.
Yes, a central point of contact would be key.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you for that. My question is, again, really trying to understand as much as we can here, and you only have so many spots, and there are finite opportunities, and we understand that. When you have folks who are — through word of mouth or through your networks — arriving at your doorstep or sending a message, that’s one thing, but we know the people who need it the most are the ones who are probably not coming to your doorstep or to the tiny homes.
How do you approach the situations when you know that the people out there who need it the most, who came for that first tour or even a peek, might have gotten to your doorstep but are resisting and disappearing? How do you go after that? Or do you not go after it, because you know there is someone who can take the next bed?
Mr. Field: For us, we want to stay in contact with all our veterans in each jurisdiction and so forth, but there has to be a want and desire on the veteran’s part as well. It is not a one-sided conversation. What we found in the past is that if the veteran is not engaged in the process or in the program or has interest, that’s okay. Maybe some day they will. We want them to be aware that we will always be here to be a sounding board or help in a crisis situation. A lot of our veterans choose not to go into a program or choose to not want help at this particular point.
It is a matter of staying in contact, and staying in contact with all our community partners and other non-profit agencies that are serving veterans.
BGen. Mulawyshyn: To echo Mr. Field, those are the partners and the city shelter system. We have a waiting list of over 30-plus veterans right now, and sometimes a room will open up, and we can’t find them again, because they are transitory, or they have moved on and they don’t have a cell phone. You can’t send them an email, and so you lose track of them.
It is tough, especially if they are couch surfing or in an encampment. It can be challenging, because a lot of veterans say, “I’m okay. I’m okay, and buddy needs it more than I do,” and you see that great sense of community. Although we are impermanent housing, and you could stay there as long as you want, out of the 40, we’ve had 68 so far, because people are moving out, because they got some support. They got what they needed to deal with their underlying issues, and they moved on to permanent housing or to the market or back with family, because they want to open up that spot for other veterans to come in, because they still have that sense of community. It is amazing to see that desire to still keep serving their fellow veterans.
It is challenging. How do you find them? How do you get them in? How do you get them to accept it? For many of them, it has been years, and it is tough. There are a lot of mental health and addiction issues out there.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you.
The Deputy Chair: I am going to ask two quick questions. I would like to thank you both for what you are doing and for your service to our country, which has gone fairly unrecognized by millions of people. I think you are doing incredible work, and I thank you on behalf of the Senate.
How do you promote psychological aid and the idea of education and job security to veterans when they come in? That must be a growing process over time. Is it? How do you do that? The last question is from Senator Patterson, who had to leave. She wanted to ask about RCMP numbers in your homes, and if there are any foreign military people in your homes?
Those are the two questions. If you could answer them quickly, I would be grateful.
BGen. Mulawyshyn: I will quickly go first. For the RCMP, there is none. If you look at the Point-in-Time counts, it is very low RCMP; the Canadian Armed Forces, or CAF, represents, by far, the majority of homelessness veterans. For foreign military veterans, we do have a female veteran, a Canadian citizen who served in the United States Navy. The way the U.S. system works is that benefits don’t apply if you are not a citizen of the United States, whereas in Canada, VAC support is worldwide, no matter where you live. The system is different than in the United States. She is with us. Support is key. You can lead a horse to water, right? We offer supports, whether it’s addiction treatment, mental health treatment, operational stress injury support or fitness training to return to healthy living.
You have to show them what’s possible because they don’t come in and say, “I want this, and I will hop right in and take this program. I want to go to treatment.” No, it is a process. It takes about a year just to stabilize when they first come in, to catch their breath, to lose some of the paranoia, always looking over the shoulder, asking, “Where is my next meal coming from? Where am I sleeping tonight?” Then they can start accessing the program. That’s what is great about the program. Veterans come in and see those who have been there for a while and what they have been able to achieve. They have seen that so-and-so received this settlement or this treatment program.
My mental health specialist says, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make them drink.” However, you can make them thirsty. Her thing is to show them what is there. It is one step forward and two steps back; it’s a long process, and it is all about patience, being supportive and being there for them.
The Deputy Chair: Mr. Field, could you answer that or comment on it, please?
Mr. Field: There are no current RCMP members. To the mental health question, as an example, I have the benefit of being married to a psychologist, and I receive my therapy for free every day whether I want it or not. In many cases — to BGen. Mulawyshyn’s point — these veterans live in fight-or-flight mode while they are on the streets. They don’t have time to reflect or think about their dire situations or what put them on the streets and so forth. It is amazing to me how many times we will have a veteran come to our village, and they have not consumed alcohol in years, have not had any drug addiction issues and seem reasonably mentally stable. They come into the home and you would think that by being in the home, they would not have to worry about having a roof over the head or where the next meal is coming from, but in many cases, it triggers them. Now, because they are not in fight-or-flight mode, they have time to reflect on the trauma in their lives, their experiences in the forces. In many cases, we’ve triggered mental health issues by providing them a home where they can just be quiet. Being quiet, in some case, actually creates problems because they start to reflect and think about what put them in this situation.
Finding the balance — each journey is different. They work at their own paces. We bring them out of their shell over a period of time. We have wonderful success stories about our veterans, and we are very excited about it. That’s a fantastic question.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you both for being here. Are there any other questions before we adjourn this committee meeting?
Senator McNair: I have a comment, Mr. Chair. We had witnesses here a couple of weeks ago now who had fairly emotional testimony. They said that it is about treating veterans with dignity.
Gentlemen, I can’t speak for the committee, but I think you are both important parts of that process. Once again, thank you for everything you are doing.
The Deputy Chair: I think we all echo that sentiment. Thank you very much for being here and for appearing today.
(The committee adjourned.)