NDVA Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL DEFENCE AND VETERANS AFFAIRS

COMITÉ PERMANENT DE LA DÉFENSE NATIONALE ET DES ANCIENS COMBATTANTS

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Monday, May 4, 1998

• 1731

[English]

The Chairman (Mr. Robert Bertrand (Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, Lib.)): Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to our session this evening on how to improve the quality of life for the Canadian Armed Forces.

We are the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs. We've had a session this afternoon. We still have roughly 13 people from this afternoon we will be hearing from to start with.

I would ask you to limit your presentations to roughly five minutes. I will be keeping time up front here, and when I go like that, it means your five minutes are up and you are to wrap up as hurriedly as possible. I would also like to tell my colleagues I will be keeping roughly about the same time for you. Anything close to five minutes and I will also give you the time-out.

If people want to make presentations tonight, we would ask you to go up to the door and register. Just give your name to the clerk there. The reason we're asking this is for my own personal information so I know who to call up.

And for people who need the translation devices, I believe they are there also.

[Translation]

If any of you would like to make their presentations in French, I invite them to do so. You will need to go at the back to register your name so I can call you when your turn comes. As I was saying in English, the witnesses will have about five minutes to make their presentations so that members may have enough time to ask questions.

[English]

So we will start right away with Ann Pritchard-Thornhill, please.

Ms. Ann Pritchard-Thornhill (Individual Presentation): Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity on behalf of the Moncton garrison to bring some of the issues to the forefront of this SCONDVA visit.

First of all, housing is a serious issue in Moncton for residents of the married quarters. They feel they are at the mercy of CFHA with regard to repairs and maintenance that's required on the MQs. We would like to resolve this by looking at having representatives deal with CFHA and bring some of the issues to CFHA's attention and possibly look at studies to upgrade the PMQ.

• 1735

Next, spousal employment is a big issue in Moncton, with regard to language. Language skills are an employment barrier in Moncton because approximately 39% of the jobs require you to be bilingual in French and English.

Detachment Moncton does not offer any French language courses at low cost to military families. The military family resource centre has only been open since September 1997, and we have not been able to implement any language training at this point. We'd certainly like to have this looked at so employment opportunities will be opened up for our military spouses in Moncton.

Medical issues. Medical coverage is not adequate in many cases in terms of families who have children with serious disorders that require medication at a very high cost. A doctor shortage in New Brunswick makes it difficult to obtain doctors. There's anywhere from a two- to six-month waiting period; therefore, any time your child is ill, you have to sit in the emergency department from four to eight hours for things like ear infections, bad colds, and the flu. That's not acceptable for our families. We'd like to recommend that it be possible to see a doctor on contract or a military physician for a short period of time until doctors can be obtained.

Pay and benefits. Many personnel, especially junior NCMs, are at their full incentive and their pay category. It's creating difficulty for them with the cost of living, as cost of living pay raises in the past have been almost non-existent.

Members transferring from the reserve to regular force, which is common in Moncton, take a severe pay cut. In one instance, a master corporal who went to a private took an $8,000- to $10,000-a-year pay cut to join the regular force. We feel a member with a family shouldn't have to endure that. We should look at each case individually and see what the members' needs are in terms of living day to day.

Deployment stress. We have units in Moncton, one in particular, where people are deployed out of the year, probably eight to nine months out of twelve. It's causing extreme stress on the families. We have no social work services in Moncton, unless you pay for it or unless you have your members' families travel to Gagetown, which is a two-hour trip by road. It is not acceptable at this point to tell people, “We can't help you unless we can call somewhere downtown”. It costs about $75 an hour for services. We feel that with highly deployed units, we should be able to provide better support to our families and their children who are enduring deployment stress.

Recreation and family life. Recreation services and programs are very limited for military families in Moncton, unless you're prepared to pay prices downtown; it costs between $400 and $700 a year to join private clubs. Many of our members and families cannot afford those prices. We have a gym, but in the first place it's a drill hall and then it's a gymnasium. We're not allowed as spouses to use the facility without our husbands with us. When a husband is away eight to ten months of the year, how do we use the facilities?

We do have a gym in the Moncton military family resource centre. However, it's limited; it's not a regulation-size gym. We do not have a swimming pool and we don't have ballfields or anything else for family activities.

Other concerns. Many of our families feel that six-month deployments are too long and too frequent. They feel if we could go towards the British system or that of other countries, where members are deployed three to four months, home three to four months, and then deployed again three to four months, it might make the pre-deployment and post-deployment easier. There is the reunion stress created when you bring families back together again from separations of six months.

Finally, I thank you very much for allowing us the time tonight to express our concerns from the Moncton garrison.

Voices: Hear, hear!

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Would you come back to the microphone, please. Mr. Benoit has a question.

Mr. Leon E. Benoit (Lakeland, Ref.): I would like to ask you a question on deployment. You said you'd prefer shorter deployment, but with the numbers in the forces and realistically looking at that, if you're going to have shorter deployments, you're going to have them more frequently. Would you prefer to have these six-month deployments less frequently, with what's tacked on at both ends, or the shorter deployments more frequently? I can't give you numbers on just how often they would have to occur.

Ms. Ann Pritchard-Thornhill: To be honest with you, many of our families believe that if they were away three months and home for three, they could readjust again. There would be some consistency to their lives in terms of when they're apart. Six-month deployments are very long. The member gets home, gets a bit of leave, gets back to work again, and generally is on training again six to twelve months later to go away again.

Six months is a long time for people to be apart, as are year-long postings, when people go to the Middle East and places like that. Our families endure a lot of stress, and it's very difficult for the reunion process after the fact.

• 1740

I think six months is a bit of a mindset because we've always done it that way, but other countries serving in Bosnia right now with our troops do three-month tours—in three, out three, in three, out three. It may be a little harder on the member in terms of getting the job done from the day you set foot on the ground to when you leave; however, I think for the families as a whole, from my experience, it certainly may be a better way of doing it than what we're doing now.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Corporal Dennis Reid, Captain Luc Plourde, Warrant Officer Helen.... Okay.

Captain Luc Plourde (Individual Presentation): I brought my bag of goodies.

I'd like to begin by thanking the members of Parliament for coming to Gagetown and hearing our voices.

We're normally a quiet group of 60,000-odd Canadians who serve our country proudly and keep our concerns to ourselves. However, today is a little different. Today is a special day. We've been given the opportunity to speak to you, our elected officials, and make you aware of all the growing concerns and problems that military members live with.

My reason for being here tonight is twofold. I'm not only here to speak on my own behalf, but I was asked to speak on behalf of some soldiers and their families who were too scared to present themselves to speak out. I know some of you may doubt that there's a fear out there, but I can assure you there is. Although we have told individuals that they can speak up, there are always some who cannot bring themselves to do this for fear of being blacklisted.

As a public affairs officer, I hear it all. I hear the complaints about too little pay, about being overworked, the new stress of alternate service delivery, and of course all the many family problems that these all bring about. All are serious in themselves and each case is different. We're human beings, and in some cases maybe some individuals exaggerate a bit about just how bad it is. However, as a military officer, I've always taken the time to listen to people who have brought a problem to me, who have come to speak to me, and since my arrival in Gagetown this past July, I must say I have been appalled at what has been shown to me.

I'm going to speak about one particular problem, and it's a problem about the private military quarters.

You see, I was a child of a military man who lived here from 1964 to 1972. Back in those days, I remember that every time we had a big rainstorm I used to put my rubbers on and go down and play in the puddles. Our basement leaked like a sieve, like a strainer. Many basements leaked miserably back then.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Capt Luc Plourde: It's 1998 and the basements are still leaking miserably. It's 26 years later and we've not figured out a solution. Is it because a solution doesn't exist or because we don't want to pay for it?

Now, CFHA is an organization that, when I hear of it and when I think of it, leads me to one big question. Why did we turn over control and responsibility to an agency with no real concern to help our service members or the money to fix the real problem? Why is our federal government constantly taking money away from the Department of National Defence and its personnel? I have my own views on this and I even have a way to give back our military some political clout, but that's not the issue tonight.

PMQs are not always an issue at all military bases, but here at Gagetown you have some site-specific problems that you may not be fully aware of.

A family came to me with their biggest concern, and ever since I went to visit their home I've had a problem sleeping at night. As public affairs officers, we don't have troops; it's me, myself and I in my office. But I felt a moral responsibility as an officer to speak up for these people because they just didn't know how to do it.

Now, mould and leaking foundations you've heard about; it's rampant in some our PMQs. Well, when we had control, CE had a plan and a policy to deal with these problems. When we had a say, things happened. If a complaint was made, any mould-related or leaky basement complaint, it was considered a health risk issue. P MED techs investigated and filled out a report to the proper authorities on base, be it the G-1 or the CTC surgeon, and the housing authorities; Health New Brunswick determined if it was a health risk, and decisions were usually made within 24 hours as a norm. CE did the appropriate work afterwards to fix the problem, and if that meant tearing out insulation, gyprock and wood and getting to the bottom of the problem, no matter the cost, it was done.

• 1745

I do have a bit of a legal background—I studied law and criminology—so what I am going to pass on now is hearsay evidence. Apparently the local CFHA authorities were briefed fully on this very serious and site-specific program to Gagetown. They were told that this was a number one health concern, and the procedures we had in place to reconcile the problem were explained. The cost of repairs to each of the PMQs was approximately $15,000.

Apparently Ottawa's CFHA authorities told us that they were aware of what we were telling them but they didn't believe the problem was as bad as it was. They believed it was a geotechnical problem and they would hire someone to conduct a geotechnical study. They even refused our offer of P MED techs to give them professional advice.

I have a couple of questions for the panel. Where are the study results? Where's the plan to rectify this?

There's another issue as well, and that is furnaces. It was the number two health concern. Here, at least, it seems that CFHA has a long-term plan. They are going to replace furnaces, doing so many a year. But stop to think about it. Are you one of the lucky ones on the list? If you're not, good luck surviving the winter of 1998-99. Most of the occupants of our PMQs probably don't even know they're at risk. If you have a 1983 furnace or prior, you should get an expert's opinion, because your life could be at risk. Carbon monoxide kills.

Asbestos wrap—all PMQs had it. It was an item that was proper in the fifties. The problem was identified long ago: remove it or seal it properly. Apparently CFHA was also made aware of this when they took over.

When my father visited here in March—being an ex-member—he went down in the basement to put up some shelves. He couldn't believe it. He came up white-faced. He was a chief warrant office with thirty-three years in and then he retired, and he worked at the Supreme Court of Canada for another thirteen years. He has seen it all. He couldn't believe what he thought was asbestos wrap sitting in my basement.

I'm told that this is only 5% cancer-causing and that I shouldn't worry about it unless the fibres are disturbed. I brought this for effect, because as public affairs officers we know that a picture speaks a thousand words. Can I honestly guarantee my three-year-old daughter...? I'm 33 years old. If it kills me 15 years from now, I'll have had a pretty interesting life. But what if she dies at the age of 18 from cancer caused by asbestos wrap that should have been properly removed or sealed?

I know I only have five minutes, but I have a bit more: bat guano.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Capt Luc Plourde: While home on recovery from a very serious respiratory illness, I noticed that I had some kind of problem in my basement. I thought I had mice, but an exterminator told me it was bat droppings. My chimney flange was full of it. CFHA responded to this by sending an exterminator to clean up the infected area, but I asked a pretty reasonable question: with the hanta virus and histoplasmosis and God knows what else in that stuff, aren't you going to look in my attic? He responded that was a good point, and he phoned the CFHA people to say that he was in my house and maybe he should open up the attic. But CFHA refused to authorize that. They told him to just clean it up and leave.

Now, I haven't opened it. Maybe that's negligent on my part as a father, but I'm kind of scared of what I'm going to find up there.

The point I really want to make is that it appears to me that CFHA does not care about the PMQs and the occupants.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Capt Luc Plourde: There appears to be no plan in place to check and to inspect. I cannot speak about CFHA on any other base. Maybe our problems are solely due to CTC Gagetown, CFHA management. But we're talking about health issues. If I rented a civilian apartment and found any of these items in it, I can assure you my landlord would be hearing from my lawyer and also the proper authorities that exist to take care of these kinds of problems. Again, this is hearsay, because I asked the question, and apparently military tenants have no recourse to the Landlord and Tenant Act.

• 1750

In my opinion, we're talking about a gross lack of judgment by our leadership in Ottawa, who forced base commanders to turn over these problem-filled PMQs to an organization that was not prepared to take the steps necessary to fix them. In my opinion, this even borders on criminal negligence when you're talking about people's health.

This morning, the MP for Perth—Middlesex, Mr. John Richardson, said he wanted general direction regarding our problems. My dad always told me, “Anybody can come forth with a problem, but offer up a viable solution as well.” My viable solution is that the government has to stop nickel and diming our military personnel.

You may never find more loyal Canadians than these people behind me and those who were in here this afternoon. We fund all kinds of programs in this country. All kinds of interest groups receive grants for you name it. Hundreds of thousands of seals eat all the cod fish and money is found to study them.

Why can't we fund a national program to fix the state of military housing? Give all military members the decency of knowing their homes are safe. Give commanders back the power to deal with the CFHA personnel who refuse to see a real problem when it's staring them in the face. If money is the only thing that's holding back these CFHA managers, then give them all the money they need to fix these problems.

Don't just take my word for it. I brought photographs, a videotape, and a pretty scary kind of substance in that bag, if you want to have a look at it. I asked the lady not to open it.

I'd like to say to the honourable members of the committee, I thank you for your time and your concern. Thank you.

The Chairman: Mr. Hanger.

Mr. Art Hanger (Calgary Northeast, Ref.): Have you personally had dealings with the CFHA?

Capt Luc Plourde: Oh yes. I didn't even want to go there.

Mr. Art Hanger: Was that over your own premises?

Capt Luc Plourde: That was over my own premises on two different issues. Through my dealings with them as a captain, and I'm pretty well known as a kick-ass captain—excuse the lingo—all I could think was if they are stubborn and brutal with me, what the hell are they doing to our other poor members?

Mr. Art Hanger: I don't know if you've had personal contact with the CFHA—

Capt Luc Plourde: I'm not very popular in that office.

Mr. Art Hanger: —individuals in Ottawa, but I gather it's the same response.

Capt Luc Plourde: I can't speak for other places. I'm only talking about here. I don't want to comment about any other place. I have many pets at home and I wouldn't let my cats live in some of the houses people are forced to live in here.

Mr. Art Hanger: Thanks very much.

Capt Luc Plourde: You're welcome.

The Chairman: Thank you, Captain Plourde.

Helen Martin.

Captain Brent Kerr.

Captain Brent Kerr (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, honourable members, I was going to talk about the soldiers' conditions of work and their conditions of pay, but I can't say that. I'm a captain and they've spoken far more eloquently today than I possibly could.

So I'd like to go to the next stage and propose a solution. I suggest the base root of all problems is money, and the biggest problem for individual soldiers is the money they have. They do not need a new motto; they do not need a new pin; they need money.

• 1755

But that's no good to you. That's not your job. Your job isn't to just generally wave a hand; your job is to come up with solutions. I have one for you. There is only one job in my mind that comes close to what a Canadian serving soldier does. We go overseas, we get shot at, we're in danger of being blown up by mines, we're isolated, and we have many hardships. The only job description that comes faintly close to that is the RCMP. The day someone joins the RCMP, according to the rates of pay I have here, he earns $31,000. After two years of service he earns $47,000.

I have a very specific question I would like to ask the chairman first and then each member of the board afterwards. I would like you to look me in the eye and tell me you think my soldiers lives and wages are worth less than the RCMP, Mr. Chairman.

Voices: Hear, hear!

The Chairman: Go ahead with your presentation, sir.

Capt Brent Kerr: That's it. I've come here and I think we should be paid the same wages as the RCMP. Our pay should be linked to the RCMP. I would like a response, as a soldier and as a citizen, from the chairman of the committee as to whether he supports that or not.

A voice: CFHA takes the money from us.

The Chairman: When we write up the report we will be looking at all these different pay suggestions that have been brought forward. Just to give you an example, in our first week we were in Comox and some admiral suggested a 20% or 25% pay hike. Now we also have to be realistic. I don't think I could look you in the eye right now and tell you we will be recommending a 25% pay hike. We have to be—

Capt Brent Kerr: My question is not about a percent, sir. It's about a principle that a soldier's life and work are worth something, and should be worth at least the same as the RCMP. I want a commitment from you that either you believe we are equally valuable, or as you're saying, you'll look at it.

The Chairman: I'll be quite honest with you. The only thing I can tell you is we will be looking at it. I can't make you a promise right now, and I don't think you're expecting one.

Capt Brent Kerr: I'm not asking for a promise that you'll do it. I'm asking for your answer on whether you believe it. If you don't believe it, is there anyone on the committee who will give me a straight answer as to whether our soldiers are worth what the RCMP is worth?

Mr. Art Hanger: I think our soldiers are worth exactly what we pay police officers in this country. I was a police officer myself for 22 years and faced certain dangers associated with that job. I recognize that your dangers are maybe somewhat different from policing, but some of them are also the same.

The difference and the negligence that has taken place is that police have an association. They are in the public eye and negotiate their wages, whereas the soldier depends upon the government, and the government owes him that protection, which you haven't been getting. I think government has failed in its job miserably and had better right the wrong.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Capt Brent Kerr: I'd like to thank the defence critic from Reform for his remarks.

Are there any other members of any other party who wish to answer my question?

The Chairman: Mr. Price.

Mr. David Price (Compton—Stanstead, PC): I would agree with you 100% on that, although I have to admit, as the chairman does, that dollar-wise we can't guarantee anything. But we definitely agree there can be no difference between the two. They both serve the country and serve the country well. I agree 100%.

Voices: Hear, hear!

• 1800

Mr. John Richardson (Perth—Middlesex, Lib.): I don't think the chair wanted to avoid that question, but I don't think any one of us at this table disagrees with the principle Mr. Price just gave. Your lives and your work are just as valuable to the Canadian people as that of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby—Ajax, Lib.): My brother was an Ontario Provincial Police officer who was shot and killed in the line of duty. Your life is worth it, and you should be paid as he was.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Mr. Hec Clouthier (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, Lib.): Captain, I don't believe anyone on this committee would disagree that pay is a very important issue with the Canadian military, but if you expect me personally to sit in front of you tonight and guarantee that you are going to get equal pay, I can't do it, because I didn't know until tonight what the RCMP were getting.

I do believe parity should be taking place, but at the end of the day, we'll have to look at it and see what we can possibly do. But I do agree with you that the rationale is there. There's no question about it.

Capt Brent Kerr: Sir, I thank you again, and I recognize your limitations as well as mine. All I wanted was the commitment that you agree with that principle.

I have a copy of the RCMP pay rates right here, which I got from my neighbour. It took me two minutes to do. I'll give them to the committee if you want.

Mr. Hec Clouthier: Certainly.

A voice: Are those the pay rates that went into effect two weeks ago?

Capt Brent Kerr: No, this is not the 7% they got last year. This is based on 1997, having them make almost $20,000 more than our soldiers after four years in.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Captain Kerr.

Sergeant Gilles Laflamme?

Master Corporal Pam Morrison?

Master Seaman Peter Bech?

Corporal Sheldon Gordon?

Nathalie LeBlanc?

Ms. LeBlanc.

Ms. Nathalie LeBlanc (Individual Presentation): Hi.

I would like to know why in the military a private or corporal cannot get a French course in Quebec for the year when it could help their career as much as it would a master corporal or sergeant. Maybe it would even help advance their career faster.

As well, I would like to know if it would be possible to have a day care on base, either in the gym or anywhere else on base. It would be easier for women who want to go to the gym in the daytime. Everybody I know has children already, two or three, and it's pretty expensive to go to a day care just to be able to do things on our own.

In the PMQs, the basements now are called “living spaces”, but they're leaking all over the place. The windows we have to tape up and put plastic over. There are cracks in the wall. We painted it last summer, so this summer the wall didn't crack, but how long is it going to take until it leaks again?

As for insulation in there, well, there is none. It's like that for pretty much everybody. You need to put plastic on the windows, and they're so bubbled up you can't even close the blinds any more. I know in my house it was like that, but I don't know about anybody else.

The pay raise? Well, it's really nice to have a raise, but at the same time, three or four months down the road the rent goes up again, and then you're at the same point as before. It feels good to have a little bit of extra money. You can buy more things for your children or for yourself. But then again it's like it's just a slap in the face. Here—a pat on the back—you get a raise, but then, whoops, we're taking it back.

• 1805

That's all I have to say.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Nathalie, are you a member of the Armed Forces?

[English]

Ms. Nathalie LeBlanc: No, my husband is.

The Chairman: The course you were suggesting, is it for the Canadian Forces personnel or is it for the spouse?

Ms. Nathalie LeBlanc: For the personnel. I know the spouses can get them on base here, but the French course in Quebec is a one-year course that is only French-speaking. In Quebec City they go visiting every museum or everywhere. They have to go in a store and speak French. They have to speak French; they don't have the choice. Even amongst each other they have to speak French. It would help my husband in his career, but it would also help him speak to my daughter, because I speak to her in French and he cannot understand a word.

The Chairman: Oh, I see.

Ms. Nathalie LeBlanc: It would also help him in his career to advance faster. I believe so.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Mr. Lebel.

[Translation]

Mr. Ghislain Lebel (Chambly, BQ): I did not quite understand your first suggestion. Are you suggesting that French courses be given to the military personnel who are stationed in Québec?

Ms. Nathalie LeBlanc: No, to the people here. My husband is an Anglophone and does not speak a word of French. He had asked to take a course in Québec, but since he is a Corporal and not a Master Corporal, he was not eligible. Privates and Corporals do not have the opportunity to take such a course. They can only register for the one given here, which lasts three or six months. The courses are not as intensive as those you could get in Québec. Not that I want to return to Québec for a year; that is not the point. But it would help my husband in both his career and family life.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: But did you not say that he does not want to learn it?

Ms. Nathalie LeBlanc: No. I tried to teach him, but I do not have enough patience, and he does not have enough patience to learn it, at least not with me.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: I see. Thank you.

[English]

A voice: I think what the problem is, and what she's trying to get at, is the fact that we run French language courses in places like Victoria—okay? Yes, the course is going to run throughout the day, and the individual will learn French, but then he goes back to the English environment, whereas if he's in Quebec, he has no choice.

I know. I did that course about ten years ago, and when you go back to your room or your house, everything around the area is French. When you go to buy bread, you have to do it in French. I think that's what she's trying to get at.

A voice: You can request it all you want, but if you don't have the right, you're not going to get it.

The Chairman: Thank you.

David.

Mr. David Price: Just to follow up on Mr. Lebel's question, are you saying that for master corporal and up there's no problem? They apply, and they—

Ms. Nathalie LeBlanc: There's no problem at all for them.

Mr. David Price: But for anyone from that rank on down, there's no access at all?

Ms. Nathalie LeBlanc: There's nothing for corporal and private, I believe. It's so hard for them to get anything. As soon as you get master corporal, life is easier for you. You can get a French course. It's easier for you to get a French course than for my husband.

Mr. David Price: Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Corporal David Sterling.

Corporal David Sterling (Individual Presentation): Good day. I had a question when I was here this afternoon, but as you know, we ran into a little bit of lengthy time.

About the third person in, someone asked, “What do you think the morale problem is in the military?” Well, I think that's a question now the panel here could answer itself. Everything that's been brought up today is the morale problem. The problems at home because of CHFA, pay, everything. That is our morale problem.

• 1810

Voices: Hear, hear!

Cpl David Sterling: Too many times we come to these events, speeches, talks, and everything, and we come back with the attitude, “Ah, what the hell was this for? Nothing's going to change. Nothing will change. Why did I bother coming?”

I have a question for the panel here, though. You did mention this afternoon a really good question, and you started mentioning it this afternoon, so the question was pretty well answered already: How can you specifically do something?

You have different party members from the Reform Party, the Liberals, the Bloc, and the PC together as your panel. Yes, you're going to put this report in, give it to this person, blah, blah, blah. So what? An election comes up, a new person's in charge, and it's going to mean nothing again. I can sit back, go to my local pub, talk to the bartender, tell him my problems, and it's the same thing.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Cpl David Sterling: Basically all I was trying to find out is a little more detail exactly. As I said, you really answered the question well this afternoon before I had a chance to speak, but maybe for a lot of people who weren't here this afternoon, we could have a little more detail there, please.

The Chairman: Okay.

Cpl David Sterling: Thank you.

The Chairman: The question was asked this afternoon about basically what the corporal just said: How is our report going to affect anything? Well, there are five parties sitting on SCONDVA right now—the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs. We were asked by the Minister of Defence to go around to as many different bases as we can, talk to the people, and get their input on how to improve quality of life. This is what we're doing. We've been to quite a number of bases, and this is why we're here tonight.

With all this information, we will go back and write up a report, and in that report we will be making recommendations on pay, housing, education, and so on. Everything we have heard we will be making recommendations on.

The House finishes sitting, I believe, the second or third week of June. We should by that time have gotten all the background information. The researchers are going to sit down this summer and write up the report. We will meet at the end of August or the beginning of September and finish the report. Then, once the House starts sitting again at the beginning of September, we will be there to hand the report over to the House of Commons, which will then give it to the Minister of Defence. We sincerely hope the minister will put into effect most of the recommendations we will have made.

As I was mentioning this afternoon, there are five parties. What would help the report quite a bit is if we could be unanimous on all those recommendations. Unanimous means that all the five parties agree on the recommendations.

Cpl David Sterling: Never happen.

The Chairman: It will be pretty hard, but we hope, because we are all here to try to improve quality of life. If we could arrive at some consensus, it would give more weight to our report. That is why all the committee members are here this evening: to listen to you. That's what we are here for.

Cpl David Sterling: I have a question on that, Mr. Chairman. When you put in this report, can it get passed back down to us little guys down here? We know—

The Chairman: It will be on the Internet.

Voices: Oh, oh!

Cpl David Sterling: Not everyone is computer-literate.

The Chairman: I can assure you there will be copies circulating. It's open; it's not closed. We can send them to the base.

Cpl David Sterling: Exactly, through the chain of command to come back down to us. No one out here is stupid. We know, no matter what you ask for or whatever, not everything is going to get passed, right?

The Chairman: Right.

• 1815

Cpl David Sterling: But if we get to see that you asked for this, this, and this, if it gets turned down—that stuff happens; some stuff gets turned down—at least we get to see what you asked for and we can see that someone is actually asking for us. That does make a lot of.... You know, things like that bring up morale.

The Chairman: We'll make sure that, one way or another, you get a copy of this report.

Mr. Lebel.

[Translation]

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: I would like to point out, for the benefit of those who speak French here, that several people on the various bases asked us what would be in our report, and if there were chances that it would be accepted by the Minister. Unfortunately, I do not share the Chairman's enthusiasm here today. I am not as optimistic as him.

During a meeting of our Committee last week, I suggested that we invite a former Defence Minister to provide more information, as he would know the Armed Forces very well. Marcel Masse was Minister of Defence for at least four years. My proposal was fiercely rejected by my friends of the government party, but I do not know why.

If you are expecting results from these hearings, push the government, because I do not expect miracles after tabling our report. This is the sad truth.

[English]

The Chairman: Leon.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think the toughest thing isn't going to be to get a unanimous report. That may or may not happen, but there's a fair chance that could happen. We've all heard the same things. If we feel the report doesn't accurately reflect what we've heard, then we will put in a minority report. We won't accept the report.

But all of that really doesn't matter. When it comes down to it, it's whether the government is willing to act on the report or not. So if you're going to base that on history, chances are pretty slim, because past reports haven't been acted on very well at all. But I do feel there's going to be more pressure on government on this one, because we're dealing with real issues that affect real people.

The media has heard your case right across the country as we've gone from base to base. They've expressed your concerns. The media play an extremely important part in this, because that's what's going to put the pressure on government to act. I encourage you to help with that process.

Certainly, as the official opposition, we will push the government in every way we can to not just accept the report but act on the report. But what will happen ultimately comes down to the government and whether they are committed to what you've been asking for or not. I guess we'll see.

The Chairman: Just to add a point of clarification, when the committee submits its report, the government has 150 days to come back with a response, so one way or the other, we will be getting a response.

To come back to what I think Mr. Benoit mentioned, with the last couple of reports that have been handed in—I'm thinking in particular of the Dickson report on reserves, I believe—the government implemented between 70% and 80% of its recommendations. It has been like that for the last two or three reports. I can agree with you that maybe in the last eight or nine years some of the reports have not been acted upon, but I'm telling you now that these last ones have been taken very seriously and they will be acted upon.

Mrs. Longfield.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: The other thing that needs to be said is a lot of the reports that have been handed in haven't been reports by parliamentarians to government. They haven't been tabled. They're sitting someplace at NDHQ and have never seen the light of day. This one will be tabled in the House of Commons, as the chair has said.

For those of you who are wondering how you could get a copy, I'm sure if you wrote or called the clerk or any one of the members of SCONDVA, we'd be happy to send you one. Also, they'll be available in every member of Parliament's office as soon as they're printed, and you could access them there, and through libraries as well. It's going to be a very public report.

The Chairman: Mr. Hanger.

• 1820

Mr. Art Hanger: I get a bit—I wouldn't call it angry, but I've sat in committees long enough, for five years, listening to committee work, and I've watched report after report go through. I'm going to disagree with my honourable colleague that 80% of most of these committee reports are acted upon. That's a bunch of BS.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Mr. Art Hanger: And no one can tell me that this committee is going to do what DND or the government of the day already knows. They know what the situation is out in the trenches here and yet what are we doing? Are we just walking around here like trained seals? I don't know, but we're going to find out real quick, because that report is going to go in.

I know the chairman may not appreciate some of the things I'm going to say, but I'm going to say them anyway. Don't ever forget that there's another $1 billion coming out of this budget yet that's already slated to come out. When and where is it going to happen? Are things going to turn around with another $1 billion cut out? I don't know. I can't see it happening. I just can't see it happening.

I think we as a committee could be at least honest about the fact that there's another $1 billion coming out. Where is it going to come from? It isn't going to go for pay raises, even though in principle we may agree. It just isn't going to go for pay raises. You've had your pay raises and they're a slap in the face.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Mr. Art Hanger: Personally, I'm sceptical, but I'm going to do my job, and we're going to do our job as opposition members. As Liberal members of the caucus they're going to work behind the scenes as best they can. It is not, as my colleague here from Quebec stated, up to you to lobby the government; it's up to us to do that.

The Chairman: Mr. Pratt.

Mr. David Pratt (Nepean—Carleton, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think the first obligation we have as committee members is to give the folks who are here tonight accurate information. And when Mr. Hanger says there's $1 billion yet to come out of the national defence budget, he's not correct. He's incorrect.

The budget this year for national defence was $9.4 billion. It's scheduled to go up in the next budget—not by a lot, but it's scheduled to go up. I wanted to get this on the record so that people have information that is correct. There have been a number of things said over the course of this afternoon and again this evening that aren't correct, and it's not up to me to correct everything Mr. Hanger says, I can assure you of that, but I think what we want to do especially here tonight is not debate the issues amongst ourselves but hear from the people in the audience.

Voices: Hear, hear!

The Chairman: A final comment to you, sir. As I mentioned before, the government has 150 days to answer. You were asking if this report will change anything. You will have our report and you'll also have the government report, so you'll be able to compare the two and see what kind of work we have done.

Cpl David Sterling: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Mr. Art Hanger: I have a point of clarification for these people here.

The Chairman: Go ahead.

Mr. Art Hanger: Just so you understand about budgets, there's $106 million for this base for 1997, $96 million for 1998, and $85 million for 1999. That's going down, and that is going to be happening right across this country. It's just a point of clarification for my colleague here in the Liberal caucus.

Voices: Hear, hear!

The Chairman: We've come here to listen to you. If you want to listen to the House, you can listen to CPAC.

Mr. Chris Nightingale.

• 1825

Private Chris Nightingale (Individual Presentation): I'm just a new guy in the army. I've only been in two and a half years and I have some concerns about the privates just getting in. I'm an FCS tech. I did two months of basic training, six months support in Kingston, and eleven months more training in Borden, Ontario. That whole time we were denied any kind of dental work, any cleaning, anything of that nature. There's no time allotted for us to go in there to be looked at or anything else, and, to a lesser extent, the medical was also done that way.

I had a friend on my course who had gallstones that had to be operated on and he had to wait three or four weeks, until the end of our course, before he could have his operation. I was getting dressed one morning when this first happened, and I went down to his room and he was moaning and groaning on his bed in pain, in agony, and he had to wait three weeks to go and get operated on for his gallstones. I think this is definitely an issue that needs to be rectified for the new people getting into the armed forces.

A further point I have is the pay of the privates, like myself. I'm fairly fortunate—financially fortunate that is. I don't have any children. While they are a joy to our lives, they are also a large financial burden. I just got married last week, and if I ever do have children, within the next year I would be strapped. I would have no money. I would be in debt up to my eyeballs in no time.

There has to be something done about the pay level for the privates just getting in. There used to be a time when the people just getting into the military were young men of 17 or 18. They didn't have wives and they didn't have children. But now you have all age groups and it's both men and women. They all have children, or they're married, or their spouses don't work—whatever. The pay level has to go up for those people just getting in.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

David Robinson-Vincent.

Master Corporal David Robinson-Vincent (Individual Presentation): Good evening. I have a couple of points and a little speech.

The first point I have is on the PMQ thing, and I know we've hammered this all day. Why is it that people who are forced to live in PMQs, for example, high-ranking officers, get an abatement on their PMQ rents?

I read my package in the mail. A lot of people threw them in the garbage in my shop. It said there was an abatement that was to be made for people who were forced to live in PMQs because of job requirements, job restrictions. The only people I know who have that would be someone like the colonel of a regiment, who has to live in a PMQ, as far as I know, because he has to be readily available to the base at any given time. But he makes a hell of a lot more money than I do and he gets an abatement on his Q.

There are probably people in this room who are forced to live in Qs because they can't live outside the base.

My next point is that last year, according to Maclean's magazine, colonels and up were given bonuses of 5% for good reports. We earn those bonuses for the colonels.

Voices: Hear, hear!

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: If you ask anybody in a leadership role, from a master corporal or a senior corporal on up, they'll tell you they don't earn their pay; the people who work for them earn that pay. If they don't support me, that means I'm doing something wrong. If I don't support my leaders, they're doing something wrong. If they get a good report, that means we're doing a good job. But at every turn we get punished.

• 1830

PMQ increases every year, not just every year we get a pay raise. It's every bloody year. This year I got a 15% increase in my PMQ rate. They told us last year it would be 3% max. Where did they get 15% from?

The next point is downsizing. Everybody is talking about downsizing. Somebody said earlier we're not really being downsized. Well, let's say we don't cut any more people out of the military, but every time you add another piece of equipment, another tasking, and every time another soldier has to go out and dig a ditch and hide it with a canopy, that's increasing tasking. It's the same thing as downsizing.

In my shop there are nine master corporals, four corporals, and six privates. We got the privates only this year. That's way too many leaders for the number of troops we have.

Voices: Hear, hear!

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: Until the privates got here, there were almost two master corporals for every corporal in our shop. As the gentleman from the RCR said earlier, if they push-pull—you go here, you go here, and you go here—who are you listening to?

The next point is postings, everybody's favourite point. Why is it that career managers can't get themselves together, sit down, and think, “Wait a minute. What do our soldiers need the most when we don't get enough money from the government?”

That's obvious, because the government doesn't have any more money than we do.

No, every year they make everybody as unhappy as they can by thinking, “I'm going to have my little power struggle, so I'm going to put you over here and you over there”, even though these people would rather go to the opposite places.

Voices: Hear, hear!

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: Personally, I was in that situation a few years ago, when I got posted here. It's nothing against the base. I love my shop. I'd fight to the death for them. But I wanted to stay in Petawawa, and there was a guy who wanted to come here. I know people might think it strange that I wanted to stay in Petawawa, but I loved it there because of what I got to do. I got to be a soldier and a technician, and to me, that's the best mix there can possibly ever be.

But I had to come here, even though he wanted out of there. He was in Petawawa. He had the same training as I had—the exact same training—but he had to stay there, even though he was there four years longer than I was.

That's not just me. That's almost half the people in this room.

If you can't get us some kind of incentive by money, and you can't get us promotions, then at least leave us where we're happy.

Voices: Hear, hear!

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: My last point is a big one. We've supported every government ever since we've had an army. Ever since we've had an army, the army has supported the government. The government goes back almost as far as the army does. Armies have been around since there were caves. The Canadian government hasn't been around as long as the real army has, but the Canadian government formed our army way back when.

I'll name a few places we've been: Boer War; Somme; Passendale; Vimy; the Hindenburg line; the Battle of the Atlantic; D-Day landings; Ortona; Anzio; Korea; Vietnam; Cyprus; Angola; Bosnia; Golan Heights; and ice storms and floods in our own country, gentlemen, and anything else that comes along.

We've given to the government every chance we've had. When is the government going to give back to us?

Voices: Hear, hear!

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: A moment ago—and I'm not knocking politicians or anything—you guys were almost turning this into a candidates' debate. Five different parties are represented, gentlemen, from different walks of life, different parts of the country. Some of them probably don't even want to be in this country of Canada as we know it, and even then we support it—the whole country, not just half of it.

When the soldiers from Quebec in World War II were told they weren't wanted in World War II, eventually they got in, and they dignified themselves the way everybody else has, every other Canadian soldier before us. We want the opportunity to do that for ourselves and for our country.

We may not get a lot of money, but we still want our pride, and we're not going to let anybody take that back.

Voices: Hear, hear!

• 1835

If you look around you'll see in this room all the different soldiers from all the different trades and units, from different backgrounds and different walks of life, and their wives. If it wasn't for them, we couldn't go anywhere. They deserve our support and they deserve your support.

But it's time for the political parties in this country to sit down and stop bickering. For once, clear your heads and minds and think about the people who work for you. If it wasn't for us, you wouldn't be here. If it wasn't for the armies before, you wouldn't be here. You wouldn't have the freedom you have now and you certainly wouldn't have the freedom to either break up our country or keep it together.

If any of you could sit in on a mess meeting you would see exactly what you look like on the CPAC channel. I've watched the CPAC channel and it looks like a mess meeting. Group A over here has a good idea, but group B won't support it because it wasn't group B's idea, and group C is either on the fence or not.

This is not a fence-sitting issue, gentlemen. This is our lives, this is our livelihood, and this is why we joined the military. We're here for ourselves, our compatriots, and our country, and it's time somebody started giving us some support.

That's it. Thank you.

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: That was very eloquently put, Mr. Robinson-Vincent. It was excellent, much appreciated.

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: Thank you.

Mr. Leon Benoit: First of all, to do with career managers, you made the comment that if you're not going to get properly paid, at least let you go where you're happy. We've heard that concern often. People have been posted somewhere when there's somebody else right beside them who would like to go there. They don't want to go, but it happens the way the career manager and the commanding officer determine is will happen.

The point that's been made by career managers is that commanding officers have an awful lot of say in what happens in the end, not just career managers. The other thing I've heard from career managers is they operate under a very tight set of guidelines, so they don't have as much leeway as you might think.

I'm certainly, in no way—I want this to be clear—defending the results that come from career managers and the commanding officers together. I'm just explaining what I've heard from career managers. We've heard an awful lot of negative things from them, quite frankly.

The point is the results aren't good, and too often they're not good. That's what has to be dealt with. Whether it's the commanding officer or the career manager getting better results, it's what has to happen there.

In regard to your comment on political parties bickering, someone asked us a question here tonight and I think it's important that you get an honest and complete answer. That's certainly what I intended to do. You may see that as bickering, but I don't see it as bickering at all. Just to be fair, I think all of us on the committee said we are working together on this. We see many of the issues the same way and hear what you're saying.

The point I made, and I think Mr. Hanger made, is we can write up the best report that accurately reflects what we heard out here, with the best recommendations you would buy, but in the end the government has to act on it or it's worth nothing. That's what I was saying, and I think that's what Mr. Hanger was saying.

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: True.

Mr. Leon Benoit: That's not a decision an opposition party can make; that's a decision for government only. That was the point I was trying to make there.

• 1840

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: On that, just as a little bit of a clarification, if you look at a thing like group dynamics, you could all go home tonight, all 13 or 14 of you, sleep in your comfy little beds, and think, yes, I'm going out and make a difference.

How many people are in Parliament? How many seats altogether? How many people have a vote in Parliament that show up? How many people?

Mr. Leon Benoit: Well, 301. How many show up for the votes? Different numbers, but usually 270 to 280.

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: Counting seats, not heads.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes, 301.

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: Out of those 301 people, how many parties are represented?

Mr. Leon Benoit: Five, plus an independent.

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: That's roughly 60 per party, although granted some parties have more than others. But if you take a group of people, you have one person in each group who goes back and tries to influence the rest of their group, and peer pressure also comes into effect.

Mr. Art Hanger: Party discipline.

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: Party discipline. The leader says you will vote this way. For example, and I probably won't proceed past master corporal after this, there are rules that come out, and everybody's favourite rule is the ironing of combats.

A voice: You fluff them in the dryer.

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: You fluff them in the dryer, you let them hang, the wrinkles come out. But every once in a while somebody gets it into his head that you're going to show up at work and you're not going to have any wrinkles in your combats except for the two nicely creased ones right down the front of your pants. How are you supposed to get that? Oh, put a hot rock on it.

That's just one example. People have loose interpretations of the rules. It's like a hockey game sometimes. It depends on which referee you get.

So now you're going to go back to your parties. Is anyone here the head of their party?

Mr. Leon Benoit: No.

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: No. So you're going to go back to your parties and you're going to say yes, this is a darned good idea, we should adopt this, or I'd really like to see this happen. But how many people can you convince in your party once you get back to Ottawa? You're not here. Once you get away from here, you're disconnected from the whole thing.

So I would ask, I would beg, I would plead that when you go back, try your hardest to influence the rest of the people. If they won't be influenced, take them out into the field. Show them. Show them how crappy it is out there.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

MCpl David Robinson-Vincent: Thank you.

A voice: I'll tell you one thing: if you go out in the field, don't tell us you're coming. Just show up.

The Chairman: We got that message this afternoon.

A voice: Anyone coming here will get a big shock.

The Chairman: Monsieur Nivard Audet.

Master Warrant Officer Nivard Audet (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to bring two issues today. The first one is on severance pay.

You know that we travel from British Columbia to Newfoundland over 20 years probably about 20 or 25 times. When we decide, or they throw us out after 20 years of service—because you heard all the stories this afternoon that after 20 years of service it's thank you very much if you don't make the cut—they tax us 30% on our severance pay.

Most soldiers have never had the chance to build themselves a home or a business. They have never had the occasion to bring some money aboard to their retirement because they had to pay for the PMQs or whatever.

The government comes around and taxes us 30%. They say to put it in your severance pay. If you put it in your severance pay, it's no good for you. You have to be retiring and you're not going to have a home. You're going to go to Newfoundland or British Columbia, or wherever, and you're going to have to wait a year or two years, when you're down to only about $12,000 a year to collect that money and make sure you don't pay taxes.

My second issue was why they gave a raise to the pilots this year of $75,000 to keep them in the forces.

Voices: Hear, hear!

MWO Nivard Audet: I think it's a bonus.

I was watching a show on French television about a month ago, and they were trying to recruit some females into the forces. I know we don't have a lot. They were offering them $5,000 if they passed their basic training. What the hell is this, $5,000 to pass your basic training?

There was a single mother in there who tried to join the forces. I was a single parent for two years; I know what it's all about. Imagine that poor person going in there. She's going to collect her $5,000 and go there to join the military? I think she's going to be entering into hell.

Those are all my points, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman: Thank you.

• 1845

Good news: we've finished our list from this afternoon. Now we go to tonight's witnesses.

Corporal Tony Rice.

Corporal Tony Rice (Individual Presentation): I guess the things I want to speak about are on a more personal note.

I'm currently awaiting a medical release from the military. I've got approximately 18 days left, so I'm not afraid to voice anything I have to say.

The first issue I'd like to speak about is the Department of Veterans Affairs. I've come to know that system quite well. It is well known among military injured personnel that only 10% of first-time applicants are approved by DVA. With the appeal process, the percentage rises to only 20% to 25%. As the CF takes no responsibility other than to pay 2% per year served for a meagre pension, the only other alternatives are the DVA and the SISIP.

The process of application to DVA is one filled with ambiguity. Financial compensation does not begin to cover what the member has lost, even if he is lucky enough to receive it. The idea of placing low monetary value on a person's quality of life, limbs, and health is sadistic. For example, my hand could be worth $1,000, each digit $100. Now, that seems to me as if I could go down to the nearest drug store and buy another digit for $100. That's crazy to think that way. The system is too unfeeling and lacks in the ability to provide the former member and the family the security they deserve from this country.

I'll get on to the SISIP part. I've had what I won't call friendly dealings with them. The qualification for long-term disability, which is LTD, is by definition totally disabled, which means the medically released member or retired member is prevented from performing any and every duty of any substantially gainful occupation or employment for which he or she is reasonably qualified by education, training, or experience.

This, in my opinion, is too broad of a definition. From what I have experienced, it leaves the door open in favour of the insurer, with little or no obligation to see that the LTD applicant is getting the services and the money due to him for injuries or illnesses as a result of duty to his or her country.

LTD is compulsory for all personnel who enrolled into the CF after April 1, 1982. This said, it is not compulsory for SISIP to pay out to the injured or ill members who are threatened with bankruptcy due to a drop in income when medically released.

Very few military personnel become totally disabled. The majority have medical problems preventing them from working in their trade as well as continuing being a member of the CF.

Maritime Life Assurance Company does not assure anyone of compensation, yet continues to net surplus in the millions of dollars because the pay-out percentages are so low. Who is taking care of who in this equation? I'll ask you to add that up.

My last point is one to do with the CF directly. There is a serious lack of leadership within the CF. For one, I was never counselled as to what my options were once I became ill. Four years went by before I knew that I was entitled to apply for DVA. It seems the member has to look out for number one. This attitude is one that is consistent to the very top of the CF.

I have sent numerous memos up the chain of command, to the CDF himself, in an effort to alleviate the burden I will face upon release on the CF, all to no avail. A simple posting, for instance, could have solved some problems a year ago. I tried to contact through the chain of command my career manager. I was told he didn't want to speak with me. Here is a man who is supposedly in control of my career and my welfare, yet he didn't want to talk to me.

• 1850

Then, because the chain of command takes so long to get in contact with these people, I had someone send a memo to the CDS for me. He said he was sorry for my medical problems, but he couldn't help me out because of the rules in the military that he had to follow. I have memos from him, from my commanding officer at the time, from the padre, everybody who backed me up on this, yet CDS didn't see it that way. He doesn't think too much about the quality of life, obviously, and mine in particular.

So all I can say is I've served pretty near 12 years in the military now, and from the point I knew I was going to be released from the military, I've had to take it every step of the way myself. There has been no help, no handout. Anything I've found out I've dug out of the CFAOs myself. I haven't had any counselling about what's going on, what's happening to me.

On May 22 I will be a civilian, and I don't think there's going to be any type of follow-up in regard to how I'm doing, because I think they don't really care.

That's it. Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Corporal, did you mention what kind of medical problem you had?

Cpl Tony Rice: No, I didn't. It's of a personal nature and I don't want to speak about it.

The Chairman: Okay. Thank you.

If there are no other questions, thank you very much for your presentation.

Cpl Tony Rice: Thank you.

The Chairman: Oh, Corporal Rice, Mr. Hanger has a question.

Cpl Tony Rice: I have time for the Reform.

Mr. Art Hanger: Corporal, I'm curious. Have you carried this as far as you can right now, or is there another step or two that you can work on?

Cpl Tony Rice: The request I made a year ago is not feasible to me now, because I requested a compassionate posting. Part of it was to help alleviate some of the pressures that would take place once a person was out and to help in preparing for me leaving the military. I had the career manager notified that I wanted the posting in order that I could move while I was still in the military and still gainfully employed, so that my spouse could get quality employment and we could be situated when the time did come for me to leave the military.

What came back was, “You have time from six months, and then you can choose an IPR”, which means I could send my wife down there with our furniture and effects, but I would stay here in Gagetown and we could meet up once the date for my release comes due. To me, that was pathetic. I've spent enough time away from home; I certainly don't want to do it in the last year of my service, nor the last six months.

Also, I had the MP from my home district send a letter to the minister's office, and what he got back was the same type of deal the CDS had to say.

Mr. Art Hanger: I know you were talking basically about actions the career managers could have possibly worked or not worked. What about the long-term disability?

Cpl Tony Rice: It's just something we all have to pay into.

Mr. Art Hanger: Yes.

Cpl Tony Rice: I've had five operations since 1995, and I've seen five specialists, as well as countless military doctors, and I've taken perhaps more drugs than you would give to a herd of cattle. But all in all, when you go up in front of these people, whatever word these specialists and so-called doctors give is not good enough for these institutions. They want you to see their doctors as well so they can poke and prod you some more.

• 1855

When I went into the DVA office down there, I found that the doctor and the people who were supposed to go up in front of those boards on your behalf were paid by that institution It's sort of like the prosecutor buying the jury.

Mr. Art Hanger: Yes.

Cpl Tony Rice: These people are all being paid by the same company. To me, it's insensitive and crazy to think that the word of all the doctors you've seen isn't good enough. Everything has already been documented.

Mr. Art Hanger: Is that situation with SISIP finished with you?

Cpl Tony Rice: No, it isn't. None of it's finished.

Mr. Art Hanger: Okay.

Cpl Tony Rice: It's not a quick process by any means.

Mr. Art Hanger: No.

Cpl Tony Rice: Even if it was quick, it would just be quicker to find out that the answer was no.

Mr. Art Hanger: I think this complaint has come across several times about the DVA, SISIP, and how medical claims are analysed. Long-term disability settlements seem laborious, at best, in going through the process.

I would be curious if you received any recent information. If you wouldn't mind passing it on to me or to my colleague here, Leon, I would certainly follow it up.

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit, do you have a question?

Mr. Leon Benoit: I think you've kind of answered the question. My question was, when you went to DVA, did they accept the information you had put together before that or did they demand that you had to go through the whole process again?

Cpl Tony Rice: They request your medical documents, as they do with everybody. They sift through that like they were dissecting a frog. All the notes are gathered there from everybody you've seen and everything you've gone through, yet they still put you through an ordeal with their doctors and the people they have there.

In my situation, even what their doctors suggested to happen, didn't happen. I found out a year after the fact that he had suggested a percentage for me, yet they didn't act upon it. That's the kind of thing.

Then you get involved with your documents going other places such that parts of it are lost or they can't find them because they're one place or another. So it's a whole scheme of things that the person being released just doesn't want to face. You're looking at a future that's pretty uncertain. You've got a house and bills to pay, and that doesn't stop just because you leave the military.

Mr. Leon Benoit: You're saying the DVA doctors came up with a different diagnosis than that of the other doctors before.

Cpl Tony Rice: No, that's not what I said. I said the DVA doctor suggested to the board that there was, as he assessed it, something they didn't bring forward at all to me. I found that out after the fact.

Mr. Leon Benoit: How much time would you estimate you have worked to get this disability so far? Just take a guess. How many hours or how many days have you worked to try to work through the system and jump through the hoops that are necessary to get this?

Cpl Tony Rice: My illness came about in 1992 and I didn't apply until 1996. That's another beef I have. It's now retroactive to the date you apply, but what about the date that you actually became ill? It's crazy if you didn't know it was there. Since June 19, 1996, I've been fighting the system, and I'm one to fight the system, too.

Mr. Leon Benoit: And you've been spending a lot of time on it since then?

Cpl Tony Rice: Yes.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much,

• 1900

Corporal Brian LeBreton.

Corporal Brian LeBreton (Individual Presentation): Good evening. First of all, I want to thank you for being here. I think the fact that you're here, even though what's going to come out of it we don't know, just shows us that the government has some sort of interest in our welfare, and I think that for most of us it's well appreciated.

I have a couple of points. One was just a small point from my boss. The house buy-back plan right now has a limitation. The land has to be 1.2 acres. Most houses around here, unless you live in Oromocto West, are well over that.

Spousal consideration. Just as an example, my wife is a registered nurse. We moved here from Quebec, from Bagotville. When she got here, we'd just had our second child, a daughter, who was two weeks old. A few months later my wife went to get her licence here in New Brunswick and she couldn't, because she was only working part-time there. She didn't have enough hours, so she didn't qualify for the licence here. In order to get recertified it costs $1,300, and it's a year-long course.

The media doesn't seem to give the whole story. I was talking to a friend of mine. He's a civvy; I'm in a civvy band here. He was asking, “Jeez, how come you guys are complaining? You earn $36,000 to $38,000 a year. How come you can't live on that?” I find the media isn't showing all that.... For example, the housing prices around a base are a lot higher on average, say around here, than in Fredericton. I think that's pretty standard across Canada.

Another thing—the spouses example again—spouses have a hard time getting steady employment because civvy companies shy away from military spouses.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Cpl Brian LeBreton: Leadership—we've talked a lot about leadership. Unlike politicians.... You guys are elected. You develop your leaders through your parties, and you elect them, and you get the top guy. The military doesn't work that way. Basically, our leaders are promoted based on who their boss says is the best guy. How do you expect to develop leaders who actually care about the guy downstairs when they're always worried about the guy upstairs?

Voices: Hear, hear!

Cpl Brian LeBreton: Also, there are a lot of people who enjoy what they do, but may not want a leadership role. This leads again to the lateral progression. There should be some sort of system put in place so that people who are not necessarily leaders, who do not want to be leaders, but who want to get paid for what they do.... I think there should be some system in place for that.

Being in the air force, we got our new kit. It works great—warm; love it, except for one thing. You put it in the washer and it falls apart.

PMQs—just an example again. We've heard a lot of horror stories about basements and that. I have one more to add. I have mould growing up all along in the upper bedroom. We've killed it with chlorine, but it keeps coming back.

One last point. I'm a bilingual person. I learned French after I was about 20. I was posted in Bagotville, Quebec for three years. One of the biggest problems the CF has between their members internally is the fact that the policy isn't the same across the board. It should be the same for English and French.

• 1905

Voices: Hear, hear!

The Acting Chairman (Mr. David Pratt): That's it, then, Corporal LeBreton?

Cpl Brian LeBreton: Yes.

The Acting Chairman (Mr. David Pratt): Okay.

I have Mr. Benoit and then Mr. Price.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Just a quick question. What kind of equipment did you say fell apart in the washing machine?

Cpl Brian LeBreton: It was this jacket, Mr. Benoit. Well, not this jacket, my other jacket, the lightweight Gore-Tex jacket. They come apart underneath the sleeves, in the back.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Okay, thanks.

The Acting Chairman (Mr. David Pratt): Mr. Price.

Mr. David Price: You mentioned a difference in policy between English and French. Could you elaborate a little bit on that?

Cpl Brian LeBreton: I don't know what the percentage is, but most French people, when they come from Quebec into the forces, get English language training upon finishing their basic training, but English people don't.

Now, that's probably because of money, but if we're going to have an ideal of what a military person should be, if he's representing Canada as a whole, and we have two official languages, then I think we should have equal treatment for English people coming in.

Mr. David Price: So you're referring to what Mrs. LeBlanc referred to earlier, about corporals and privates not having access. Is that what you're talking about?

Cpl Brian LeBreton: English people, when they come out of basic training, don't automatically get French training, and if they're going to force people who are French to learn English, then I think they should.

Mr. David Price: Right. Thank you.

The Acting Chairman (Mr. David Pratt): The next speaker is Sergeant Mike Walsh.

Sergeant Mike Walsh (Individual Presentation): Good evening. I hope I don't come off too disjointed here, but I'd like to echo a couple of comments.

First, I'd like to mention that the corporal or master corporal who spoke four speakers ago—I forget his name—touched on some pretty important points.

About three weeks ago, when I heard that SCONDVA was coming here—and there are so many acronyms in the army, but “SCONDVA” was something I remembered as being the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs—it was something I was looking forward to getting my teeth into. It was followed a week later by the article in Maclean's. Again, I saw a couple of letters to the editor in the front pages there. They talked about other people getting their feedback in about it as well.

So about a month ago I heard you were coming. Then, just two weeks ago, my troop commander said, “Yes, we're going to be over in J-7”. So I really sunk my teeth into it and did a bit of studying.

My case in point has lost its effect right now because of some of the other points that were brought up, but there was reference to a study—and I believe it was you, Mr. Price, who mentioned this today when we were out during a coffee break—that was done by an entity on the pay equity between the public sector and the Canadian Armed Forces.

I went back, called the Public Service Alliance of Canada, got the results of the pay they got for the last ten years, and compared them with what we got paid in the last ten years. When there was a study done by a SCONDVA subcommittee, it took from 1992 to 1997, or five years, to do that study.

In the Canadian Armed Forces, we don't have pay guides any more. I guess it was too embarrassing. They stopped printing them about five years ago. You used to be able to go into a pay office and actually look and see what you were making.

Again, it took me one afternoon to call the Public Service Alliance of Canada and get all the pay that members of the public service were getting. The two I was interested in were general labour and trade and general service, because I figure those are what the basic soldier in the army is a little bit more comparable with.

So I give you, five years wasted on a study you did. I wish Sergeant York was here, because he gave the actual inflation rate over that period. Personally, I know in the last three years it's been over 6%. The total I came up with, cumulative, for the last three years is that what we have is 5.4%. That's cost of living—our salary rates in the last three years versus cost of living, which is over 6%.

• 1910

So even though you did a study for five years, from 1992 to 1997, and you came up with a salary imbalance, we eventually got, after seven years, since the original study began, a total of 5.4% in the last three years. It doesn't come close to the cost of living.

I didn't even want to mention that, but I wanted to come back to you.... As I said, I might come off a little bit disjointed here. A lot of people who weren't here today....

I was really amazed that when soldiers were speaking in uniform in front of their peers, there was a solidarity among members, be it in the infantry or the air force or whatever. There was a solidarity there. It was really good to see.

With all these points we're mentioning now, sometimes I looked up there and a lot of people just had their heads down or were tapping their mikes, drinking water, or whatever, or they would get up and leave. I appreciate that you're MPs and you have other jobs in your ridings, but the point that was made by the corporal back here is that this committee is going to go back, and after a little bit of infighting between yourselves, you might table a report after several months.

I give it to you that Mr. Eggleton has a win-win situation. He gives you a job to come out and hear our plaints, and people bring obviously heart-wrenching stories to the microphone, they bare their souls in front of you, and a lot of times you're not really paying attention; you're not really listening to it.

When I actually heard you guys fighting up there—and again, this is going back to what he said—it really made me sick. These people are putting their hearts on the plate here, and I think of some of the other stories that were in Maclean's, and to think all that is really for nothing.

I put a little bit of research into it, and obviously other people do. Maclean's does research for you. The members who come up before you do the research. It's there in black and white. And then when Captain Plourde and Captain Kerr come up and everybody seems to be agreed that yes, we should be paid more or whatever, you can't actually put your hands up and show the same solidarity that the soldiers show together. Why is that?

Voices: Hear, hear!

Sgt Mike Walsh: Basically it comes back to the same thing somebody else alluded to. Actually this afternoon I was writing down words such as “solidarity” and “integrity”. I'm wondering what kind of integrity the committee has when you can't actually put up your hands. It's like, “Is he going to put up his hand? Maybe I'll just...”.

Why can't you actually forget about other people sitting beside you and take this by the horns? I don't know. Maybe when you go back to your own political parties, you'll get an “Attaboy” and a pat on the back. Why does it have to be you versus them? Why can't you just take the bull by the horns and say, “This committee's going to do something. We're going to table something. It's not going to get watered down. We're not going to drag our feet. We're going to take it right to the man and we're going to say, `Listen, Mr. Eggleton, it wasn't a win-win situation. These are the demands the soldiers have, these are the concerns they have, and this is what we have to do.”'?

I know that in the public sector, several months ago their higher-paid computer programmers and people like that just got 17%, because a lot of people were leaving the service. Again, with the air force pilots, they're going to Air Canada, and bam, they get this huge pay raise.

We don't have a union. We don't have any recourse. We can't go on strike. When I brought it up to Mr. Price, at the time I thought you were our best link to the government and the closest thing we could get to a union, and I said that. A union stands behind its members. We are the Canadian Armed Forces and you're the Canadian government. You've been given a job. Why can't you put your political squabblings apart and come together for solidarity and get together and deliver something that's not going to get watered down? Again, as somebody else said, we want to see the results.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Sgt Mike Walsh: That's all I have.

The Chairman: Okay.

Mr. Clouthier, you had a comment.

Mr. Hec Clouthier: Sergeant Walsh, first and foremost, far be it from me to get into a quid pro quo with you, but when you question my integrity as a member of this committee.... Sergeant, I'm a newly elected member of Parliament. I asked the Government of Canada.... This was my first choice, because I'm from the riding of Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, and Petawawa is in my riding. My wife happens to be a self-confessed army brat. I have a lot of empathy for your difficulties, and I don't believe personally that I can sit here and have you come to the microphone and say, “I question your integrity.”

• 1915

Sgt Mike Walsh: I meant the integrity of the committee, sir. I did not mean to attack anybody, but I have seen members arguing back and forth, and obviously—

Mr. Hec Clouthier: Sergeant, certainly, but listen, I've been to some defence committee hearings, whether it's in Petawawa or here or other places, and I've heard NCOs coming to the microphones questioning the integrity of the colonels and generals. So I don't believe it's just indigenous to the committee here. Speaking as a member of the committee, I believe each and every member of this committee, from any political party, wants to do the job.

If you want me to stand in front of you tonight and say, “I'm going to deliver; I'm going to promise each and every thing that you want”, I can't do that. As I indicated to Captain Kerr when he said he wants to be in the same pay range as the RCMP, I can't promise that. We're going to make recommendations, and to be candid with you, I don't even know if I'm going to be prepared to make the recommendation that you should be paid equal to the RCMP, because in one way it's comparing apples and oranges. That's food for thought for another day, but rest assured that I'm trying to do the job.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Mr. Hec Clouthier: Ladies and gentlemen, if you want me to play the political game and tell you exactly what you want to hear, it's not going to happen.

I realize the difficulties you people have. We're here listening to you. We're going to table the report. Believe you me, we are going to bend the ear of the defence department and of the minister, but I can't personally promise that I'm going to solve all your problems, or that the panacea is this committee.

We're going to try, Sergeant, and we are listening with open ears and open minds to the difficulties you have. If some people on this committee want to play the political game and say, “Listen, it's all the government's fault if it doesn't work out”, well, jeepers, Sergeant, it's not the government's fault for each and every problem that there is out there. There are many, many problems that we have to face ourselves.

I know you have a great deal of problems out there. We are going to try to help. That's all I can say.

Voices: Hear, hear!

The Chairman: Mr. Pratt, you had something to add.

Mr. David Pratt: Just very briefly, Mr. Chair.

I think what the folks here at Gagetown have to understand is that we are walking a fine line in terms of what we're trying to do. As Sergeant Walsh has said here, we have heard over the course of the last several months...and I'll give you the rundown of where this committee has stopped. We started in Yellowknife in January. We went from Yellowknife to Esquimalt, Esquimalt to Comox, Comox to Edmonton, Edmonton to Cold Lake, Cold Lake to Moose Jaw. We were in Kingston, Trenton, Petawawa, and now we're here.

We have heard some very, very emotional stories from people. And you're right, Sergeant, people have bared their souls to us in terms of the problems they face as individuals, and the problems they have coping with family life, given all of the pressures. Nobody sitting up here could help but be affected by some of the stories we've heard.

As Mr. Clouthier said, the easiest thing for us to do, the easiest thing politically, would be to say, “You want to earn what the RCMP is earning—$50,000? No problem. We'll make that recommendation to the Minister.” Would we get the ear of the minister if we made that sort of a recommendation, setting aside the issue of pay comparisons and all of the detail that goes into that? We'd lose our credibility, I think, if we made that sort of recommendation. We have to go back to the minister and back to Parliament with some very careful recommendations.

We heard from General Dallaire just about a week or so ago before the committee, that this committee has heard something in the vicinity of 300 to 400 issues alone. Everything has been mentioned, from mess dues to the number of flights that are available. We've covered the range of topics. We're hearing a few different things here tonight, and I guess one of the things I was trying to get at earlier was that we want to hear more, and we can't do that if we're always having these exchanges back and forth, unfortunately.

What I'm getting down to here is that it's not our job and it's not responsible for us to tell you what you want to hear. We have to try to make sense of what you have to say, try to bring it together in terms of a good report that we can sell to the minister and to Parliament.

• 1920

A voice: I have just one point. The fact that we need to have a standing committee on our salaries and conditions speaks for itself. Do you think the RCMP is here having standing committees on their salaries? No, but we in the military are. It's a farce that we need to have a standing committee on the way we live.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes, Sergeant, I would just like to take exception to your comment that some of the MPs weren't listening, weren't paying attention, or didn't care, because I believe that the MPs from all parties here are sincerely listening to what's being said. I have no doubt of that.

My earlier comments were more about what's going to happen once the report is actually put together. We count on you and others to present your cases to us. If you want to be critical of the way the committee works, I think that's your right, too.

The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Benoit.

I'm going to put my committee chair hat on now just to tell you people that I have been travelling with all these committee members for about five or six months now, and I'll be the first one to agree that we do have different opinions on different subjects, but when it comes down to what we can do to help the military, I can assure you that all these members are here, no matter what party they're from, to set the record straight or to get the most for you people. That's all I wanted to say.

With your permission, as it's 8:25 p.m., I would like to maybe call for a five- or ten-minute break. Then we can come back.

Mr. Price.

Mr. David Price: I just wanted to, first of all, thank Sergeant Walsh. I'm glad he did get up and make that presentation.

Just to follow up on what we had talked about earlier concerning this committee, first of all, we all chose to be here. We are not named directly to a committee and told to be here. We're here because we want to be here. I'm here because I want to be here. I'm really interested in what's going on in the military. That was the motivation behind me being here.

Now as far as the bickering that could go on, well, first of all, I'm positive we will come to a consensus on the different things that are being discussed here. There are bound to be differences of opinion, that's quite normal, but we'll come to something solid by the time we're finished.

Then, as somebody did mention here, the members of the government will probably have their hands tied a bit to get things done around here, but that's the opposition's job after that. Then we go after them. That's what our job is. We're the critics. When things aren't getting done, it's up to us to keep bringing it to the forefront and bringing it to the forefront until it does get done. I can assure you that it's not going to stop. We will keep on.

I know the committee. We do talk a lot after this, so it isn't just what's going on here. That's maybe another thing that hasn't been mentioned. In between the meetings we're having out in the public here, when we're back in Ottawa, we're also talking to people from the housing association or the finance department. We question them on the different problems and what they're looking at for ways of solving and trying to look at solutions through that.

So what we're doing on the bases is one thing, but there's still the work going on back in Ottawa. So when we get ready to put the report down, it's going to be a lot more complete than just what we saw here.

Sgt Mike Walsh: I'd just like to reiterate that I wasn't questioning the integrity of any member of the panel; I was questioning the integrity of the panel.

Mr. David Price: I realize that.

Sgt Mike Walsh: It's like watching the House of Commons on TV. It goes back and forth, and nothing gets done.

Mr. David Price: You did mention that you thought maybe it would have been interesting if we had mentioned in the beginning what we had heard across the country. I think it's important that we don't mention that so that we hear from you exactly the problems you're having here. If we were to mention a list of problems, then you would say we had already heard them so you wouldn't mention them again.

Sgt Mike Walsh: I understand that, but as a speaker leaves the mike, instead of you saying you've heard that before and you're going to address those issues, I ask: is that all? People would like to hear you say that you're looking into stuff like that.

Mr. David Price: The important thing here is that we're here to listen. The only time we're really asking questions is if something isn't quite clear.

Sgt Mike Walsh: Okay.

• 1925

Mr. David Price: We're trying not to make statements. We want to have the time devoted to you people for talking to us. The most important thing is that you talk to us, not us talking to you.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Price. Thank you, Sergeant.

I have twenty more speakers on my list. We will take a five- to ten-minute break, and then we can come back.

• 1925

• 1941

The Chairman: We have about 20 more witnesses to hear, and we'll start off with Helen Barsby.

Ms. Helen Barsby (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman and honourable members, thank you for taking time to listen to our concerns. My name is Helen Barsby, and I too have some issues that I would like to present to SCONDVA. I have problems; however, I would like to highlight concrete solutions.

Number one, I see a need for the military and their spouses to have an employee assistance program for counselling of members and their spouses. It would be non-military and would be truly confidential. There are not enough social workers on the bases. There are nine across Canada. This EPA would be part of the medical and dental package. I am a career woman; I have my own, but I think there are a lot of people who would need a program such as this. This would help with debriefing after tours, which are often haphazard and brief. People are brought into an auditorium and asked if they have any problems after being on a tour. No one is going to say they have a concern.

I'm going to go on to number two, housing. You've heard this so many times tonight: There should be a strategic plan for the PMQs. They should demolish a certain amount yearly and rebuild new ones. They have been paid for, for years. Where does the money go, other than improvements? And often the improvements are emergency issued only. Why do people want to live in 45-year-old buildings? There's mould; there's mildew. They trigger allergies.

I am from Toronto. I had never had asthma. I now have severe asthma and I'm constantly on steroids and puffers because my PMQs are full of mould and mildew. I would love to move out of that building. I don't think I'd go back to it.

Why are there not carports to protect vehicles from the elements? People have a right to have their vehicles protected; they're a big investment. Hail, rain, whatever, takes the paint off the vehicle. A carport would be an easy solution to the problem if you don't have a garage.

Number three, spousal concerns and lifestyle should be taken into consideration for postings. Most families today have dual incomes, or they need dual incomes to survive. Often spouses give up jobs, promotions and pension contributions, to be at the bottom of a totem pole again. Cannot postings be longer and our members be informed of the length of the stay, or even preferences given to location of posting, since pay is an issue?

We are no longer on a wartime footing. Why is there not a program to be created to assist spouses in job searches, or even hire spouses for base positions as esteem for their acceptance of the move, or, on the other hand, to assist with the cost of transport for members of spouses if they decide to remain on their home location? Members of Parliament have travel allowances, and this would also help with military members.

Children are also affected negatively by moves. I'm doing my master's thesis on military children, and if mothers do not adapt, studies have found the children do not adapt.

I'd like to read a brief article that I posted on the Internet to help people to be involved in my thesis. One gentleman wrote to me—and I will be brief:

How has the military affected me? Because my father got posted around so much from base to base, 1957 to 1964, I kept losing contact with the friends I had made. Consequently, I did not allow myself to make friends, became introverted and alone, and now I find it extremely difficult to open up enough to let others see the real me and become friends. I only had two people I felt comfortable enough to do that with. One of them I've lost again and it hurt very much. That was when I was in my teens; I am now 50 and it still affects me.

Yes, the gentleman is from Ottawa.

• 1945

Children's needs are also not looked at, other than with medical and compassionate postings. Support networks of extended families are disrupted unless you're lucky to be posted near one's former home. Taskings are longer and we don't have a family. There are young parents, young mothers, who do not have the support they require. A national study should be conducted on this issue. Children growing up are often dysfunctional because they don't know what it's like to have roots or nearby family members. Also, flex time should be allowed for single members of the forces who have children.

My last point is that I think there should be true freedom of speech for the military. I agree there should be order, but unquestioned, unchallenged tasking leads to apathy and the death of creativity. People are afraid to talk. Indeed a woman was reproached by a JAG member in the form of a presentation. General Baril had to have an article published stating he encouraged people to talk to SCONDVA. People are afraid of their spouses' actions, event of their pets' actions, due to the competitiveness of postings. People should have the right to be notified if they will never be promoted, and if not, accept the results and plan another future. PERs should be done on true performance and merit, with standardized tests of competence, rather than at times either being seen as nepotism or favouritism.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Ms. Helen Barsby: Career managers should be civilians who have not been associated with the military but with a human resource background, so they are able to truly act on each individual's behalf rather than token talk action due to the fact it's a temporary posting. Pay raises, which have been frozen but now reactivated, should be backdated, and individuals who were stuck at a certain level years ago moved ahead to correspond with significant increases in the cost of living.

To sum up, I have a lot more I could discuss, but for brevity I would like to add that if the military wants to retain its members and/or add new members, actions speak louder than words. People need to feel appreciated.

Voices: Hear, hear!

The Chairman: Thank you very much for your presentation.

Heather Daley.

Ms. Heather Daley (Individual Presentation): Good evening.

I'm here to talk about housing. The rent goes up two weeks after our first pay raise. Is this a coincidence? Not to me. Rent should not have to go up before all the housings are up to code.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Ms. Heather Daley: As the previous lady just said, if they're not up to code, you rip them down and you build a new one. I don't care how much it costs.

In fact, this morning I took CTV news through a PMQ. It will be on the 12 o'clock news tonight. I had to take the media through a tour of this house, which was not my own, because she was scared to death of reprisals from her husband's unit. I had to tour the house. She has mould growing over her son's bed. Is it fair? Obviously, it is to everybody else because the rent has gone up.

Just to backdate what the public affairs officer was saying, I had a bat problem in my house. For three months I was cleaning up toxic droppings on my floor. The housing agency was more concerned about the baby bats in the chimney—not to disturb the baby bats. I have two children; they were more concerned about the bats than they were about my children. Meanwhile, I was down on the basement floor, cleaning with rubber gloves and Javex. Was anybody concerned about my health? No.

There are no inspectors allowed into our house. Since housing has taken over, preventative medicine on base is not allowed to enter our house without permission. Federal inspectors are not even allowed into our house. When the exterminator came in to look at my house, the only thing he did was caulk the chimney and leave. I don't know what's in my attic. I want an inspector in my house.

• 1950

CFHA says they have a program in effect for these different situations in different houses. I wonder what is their priority assessment. It seems to me the only things that get priorities are windows, doors, and siding—cosmetics. I want my house fixed. I have 12 problems with my house and I want them fixed before August 1, 1998. If not, rip down my house and give me a new one.

There have been rumours going around base that some houses are so infected with mould that they should be condemned. I have one in my house. They said they couldn't give that house out because it was condemned because of mould. On the weekend somebody moved in with a child in a wheelchair. So in six months time, when the mould appears again, the solution for their problem is to paint over the mould. They go in and then they're out of there.

My only point in this is they shouldn't be raising our rents until every one of the PMQs on this base is fixed. Fix them first or give me $117,000 so I can buy a house, so I can build it myself and I know what goes in it. But don't treat us like idiots. I want my house fixed and I'm going to call up every week until August 1, 1998 until my house is fixed, or I'm going to be down there picketing them. Or give me a decent raise so I can buy a house. I don't want to live in these PMQs. We fix them up outside just to make them look pretty. That's the priority, to fix them on the outside and screw the inside—excuse my language.

I'm done.

Voices: Hear, hear!

The Chairman: Heather, I believe Mr. Hanger has a question for you.

Mr. Art Hanger: I wonder if you received a note like this somewhere along the way: “Annual appraisals of units at the CFHA Gagetown have resulted in a number of changes to the circulation for rent for 1998”.

Ms. Heather Daley: What appraiser?

Mr. Art Hanger: There were no appraisers?

A voice: No.

Ms. Heather Daley: I'll tell you—do you want to know exactly—

A voice: They sent the appraisers' notice and nothing else. No one came here. I want them to come and assess my basement and see what I'm living in. Right now I just have my litter box down there and that's all that's going to live in the basement.

Mr. Art Hanger: I appreciate you clarifying that point.

The next part of this note says this—and if there's anything else that hasn't been done, or whatever, please let me know:

To achieve consistency in the appraisal process across Canada, CMHC appraised all units to include the basement as storage space and considered—

A voice: So what? We have mould in all our basements—

Mr. Art Hanger: Wait a minute. It goes on:

...and consider age, condition and building standards at the time of construction with respect to insulation. The new approach will ensure that all houses are treated similarly. Phasing of rent increases, according to DND family housing policy effective March 1, 1997, will be applied to all eligible members.

Ms. Heather Daley: No. The lady's house is going to be on TV tonight. Her rent is going up $40. If you want to see what a typical PMQ looks like, watch the news tonight.

Mr. Art Hanger: We've been to quite a number of them, and I gather here—

Ms. Heather Daley: This one they're stuck in, and they're taking her rebate from her because she has no insulation in her house, so therefore she loses her rebate. It's gone, because she has no insulation.

Mr. Art Hanger: Okay. There's another aspect to this note here, and I would appreciate if you'd tell me if there's anything else that hasn't been done that they say they have:

Effective August 1, 1998, in New Brunswick only, water and sewage utilities will be included in rent charged to the occupant.

• 1955

Ms. Heather Daley: We pay now.

Mr. Art Hanger: Separate charges for this utility will not apply.

Ms. Heather Daley: We've always paid it.

Mr. Art Hanger: Reductions in rent for insulation factors will no longer apply.

Ms. Heather Daley: Exactly.

Mr. Art Hanger: Basements will be considered storage area, and rent abatements may apply upon occupant application and CFHA review.

A voice: They won't cover damage to our appliances and things if we store things in the basement.

Mr. Art Hanger: Okay.

Ms. Heather Daley: We can't use our basements as storage, because every one of them leaks. I have a river that goes through my basement every time it rains. How can I use that for storage?

Then we have floods to contend with, too. When you call somebody up, you're told, sorry, can't help you.

Nobody cares, and CFHA, Ms. Charlotte Steeves, is like talking to wood. She has no sympathy for us. I want her basically out of her job. Let's get somebody in there who's a little bit more sympathetic and is willing to listen to our problems instead of doing this all the time, and come and fix our PMQs. We're tired of talk. We want it done and over with.

A voice: We shouldn't have to clean up all this water every time it rains.

Mr. Art Hanger: This was actually submitted, I gather, to all the occupants—

Ms. Heather Daley: All of us got it.

Mr. Art Hanger: By Mr. or Mrs. Steeves?

Ms. Heather Daley: Mrs. Steeves.

Mr. Art Hanger: Okay.

A voice: She's here.

Ms. Heather Daley: She's here somewhere. She's probably hiding in the shadows.

Mr. Art Hanger: Would Mrs. Steeves like to come forward? No, I guess she won't.

I would like to submit this as an exhibit for our committee.

The Chairman: Corporal Anthony Drew.

Corporal Anthony Drew (Individual Presentation): Good evening. A lot of my points are already covered, but I'll go through what I have.

Pay equity has been flogged like a dead horse, but I think there are some points that should be looked at within the military on pay equity.

In the military there are spec trades and there are non-spec trades. I'm not saying that the people who get spec pay don't deserve the extra pay they get. I myself am in the combat arms, and the days when a combat soldier was 5% smarter than a horse are over. We are operating high-tech equipment and dangerous machinery.

Naval personnel posted to a ship draw sea pay. Whether that ship is on a patrol in the North Atlantic or whether it's tied to dock in Halifax and they are sleeping at home, they draw sea pay.

When I go on an operation and get deployed to the field, I get $13 per day field pay—

A voice: Before taxes.

Cpl Anthony Drew: —of which the federal government takes their share and I see $6 a day field pay.

Regarding the pension, there is a gross difference in what a non-commissioned member receives as a pension, compared to what a commissioned officer receives for his pension when they get out. There are a lot of good officers, but any time I've been swinging a pick, pounding a track or digging a trench, I haven't seen too many majors, colonels, or generals standing beside me doing it.

There is a point I'd like to clear up. CMHC has been taking a beating for a rent increase, so I have no love loss to my heart for CMHC. We contacted CMHC, and the rent increase on the PMQs was mandated by the Treasury Board. They had a $75 to $100 a month rent increase mandated for this year.

A voice: From where?

A voice: From the federal government.

• 2000

Cpl Anthony Drew: From Treasury Board. From the same people who said we dug deep in our pockets, and we can give you guys $40 a month after we take your taxes out of it—a pay raise—and turn around, and with the left hand steal it with a rent increase.

That brings me to another point. There's a problem starting to form in the military. The soldiers are starting to not trust their leaders. They're starting to not trust the government. Every time we turn around we've been betrayed by the government. We come back from Somalia, Bosnia, any UN tour we go on, and there's an inquiry for six months afterwards. It usually comes down to some soldier paying the price.

When the inquiry in Somalia got too close to the government, the inquiry was cut off. Why?

Voices: Hear, hear.

Cpl Anthony Drew: We're issued substandard equipment. I watched a news clip one night that showed fisheries officers boarding a Spanish trawler that was violating our waters. They had Heckler & Koch MP5 sub-machine-guns, they had SWAT tactical boots and state-of-the-art ballistic vests.

Your combat army is using boots that a civilian police SWAT force wouldn't use. They're using a rifle the Americans didn't like in Vietnam and still don't like now, but it's cheap. You have tank crews, vehicle crews, infanteers—supposedly fighting troops—wearing a uniform that's highly flammable.

We get new kit like the LSVW. Oh, there was someone's brainstorm.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Cpl Anthony Drew: They come out with a clothe-the-soldier program. Sounds good. I got my fancy storm trooper helmut and my jack-knife. I go to the field. I'm still wet. I'm still cold. Air crews are entitled to wear a Gore-Tex field kit, and the ground troops aren't. I've never seen it rain inside a helicopter yet.

Voices: Hear, hear.

I'd like to address what I consider a problem with the dependants' medical health coverage. Our deductible went up from $25 a year to $100 a year. At the same time, if you read the list, many of the services that we could claim went down, or the amounts we could claim went down. That's not to mention the fact that three-quarters of the local medical and pharmaceutical establishments will not accept GSMIP at face value. We pay for it, and then we try to claim it afterwards.

What galled me the most is that while we have to go through this hassle to be able to claim medical expenditures, the families and dependants of foreign military personnel here on an attached posting are treated at the base hospital by Canadian army MOs. These same Canadian army MOs can, on their spare time if they choose, get involved in a practice in Fredericton and put in time gaining experience at free clinics. Why can't we get a free clinic on the base for our dependants to go to?

That's all I have.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Corporal.

Liana Villeneuve.

Ms Liana Villeneuve (Individual Presentation): Thank you very much.

I came here with a bunch of questions, but I would like to begin by thanking every one of you for being here this evening. This is not the first time we have come to speak in front of the officials for or on behalf of DND. I would also like to thank the captain who spoke on our behalf.

I don't think you people understand what these men and women undergo every day when they walk out that door. At the same time, I don't think you people understand what the spouses go through, and the children. To live the way we're living and to be treated the way we're treated is indefinable. You can't even imagine what it is like.

• 2005

This is my first time being posted. I come from Ottawa; I've always lived in Ottawa. I had my own job. I'm educated. I have my two kids. I had a home.

I came out here and things just turned for me. My husband and I both, back home, made roughly over $60,000 a year. Here, we now make $38,000 a year. The housing I live in is horrible. I'm ashamed to invite people to my home with ants crawling on the floors, on the walls. One evening I went into my son's room, and I thought it was the light of the moon shining into his room. When I opened the light there were ants on his walls.

It's just horrible to see how people are being treated. I mean, these are your men and women. These are the men and women who are fighting for you, and we have to back them up every day and every night.

I don't think you understand how the wives feel when they're blamed for certain things or certain actions that maybe the husbands took upon themselves to do, and yet the wives or the husbands are blamed for those actions. They're being blamed for certain things.

You don't understand what it's like to be left at home with three kids or two kids or four kids, and in some situations five kids—you know, to live in the conditions you're living in alone, while your husband is in the bush somewhere for six or seven or eight weeks. You don't know anybody. There's no one to turn to.

A voice: Someone who's working who checks on you.

Ms. Liana Villeneuve: That's right. There's no one from the unit. I've never had anyone call me up to say “Do you need anything? Would you like anything? Can we help you in any way, shape, or form?” No, thank you. There's not one person.

I really hope you people go back and bend some ears, because up till now I haven't seen anyone bend anybody's ear back in Ottawa, to look at my colleagues, these men and women and what they live through each and every day, and the children, who are our future. It really is disgusting, and to see that the officials up there aren't doing anything about it except for “We're looking into it. We're going to deal with it. We're going to talk about it.” It's deplorable. You can't imagine how we feel, sitting back here and looking at all this.

There are so many issues I wanted to speak about this evening, but they've all been brought up. I don't know what else to ask you, but please go back to Ottawa and let our voices be heard for once, and let's do something about it. Thank you.

Voices: Hear, hear.

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit has a question for you.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Your comment about husbands being blamed for wives' actions, or wives being blamed for husbands' actions—is that a common practice?

Ms. Liana Villeneuve: Yes.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Could you explain a bit what you're saying, exactly?

Ms. Liana Villeneuve: There was an incident that happened not too long ago—and in fact the lady is present. She's speaking this evening as well, so I'll let her go through it.

But there was another incident where a man went to work and something was happening at home. It was a financial situation. He came from a situation like mine, where he had had a two-income home. He came to a single-income home and was faced with debts from Revenue Canada, and bills accumulating. He had no other resource but to go and ask for CF pass. He was told right then and there that if he was to apply for a CF pass, because he had applied for one 15 years ago, he would be looked at as an administrative risk or a financial burden—

A voice: And booted out of the army.

Ms. Liana Villeneuve: Yes, and kicked out of the military.

Now, if that's the way you treat your members.... I mean, this is a soldier who comes to you saying “I'm willing to come here. I'm willing to do my job out here. My wife lost her job. We're willing to go into a PMQ and look after our kids”, or whatever the case may be. But when the man or the woman goes up and asks for some money, is this the reply they get?

Mr. Leon Benoit: He'd be booted out of the military on what basis?

Ms. Liana Villeneuve: As an administrative.... He's a financial burden.

Mr. Leon Benoit: A financial burden to whom?

Ms. Liana Villeneuve: To the military.

A voice: It's a paperwork problem. He's an administrative burden because he causes too much paperwork.

Ms. Liana Villeneuve: That's right.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Lee Mawhinney.

Ms. Lee Mawhinney (Individual Presentation): Hi. Before I start I want to thank whoever put on the free day care at Busy Bee—

Voices: Hear, hear.

Ms. Lee Mawhinney: —because without it I wouldn't be here. You may not want me here by the time I'm done.

As you said, a lot of the issues I have have been brought up. I have a few things that I want to get off my chest. Let's start with PMQs. Why not?

• 2010

I have mould in my PMQ. I went to CFHA and asked for somebody to come in and swab for it. I had a doctor's note. CFHA told me they don't do that, and I had to go to the fire department.

So there I go, up to the fire department. They don't know what I'm talking about. They think I'm an idiot. They send me to the base fire department. The base fire department looks me and says “We don't do anything with the PMQs”.

I phoned the CFHA back. They said “Oh, yes, we can do that for you”. It was the same person I was just talking to, in person, not more than 15 minutes ago. Just waste my time for two hours, why don't you, or however long it took.

Eventually he came down to swab my house. He told me I didn't have mould. I said yes, I do. He said he didn't see any. I said it was because I scrubbed it off. He said, well, why did you do that? I told him it was because I have two small children, and I really didn't want them inhaling it 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

He said he couldn't swab for that. I suggested he take the panel off the wall. It was so wet and moist in there it was dripping through my ceiling downstairs. I said “Get a screwdriver and open it up, or better yet, I'll give you a screwdriver”. He said no, he'd come back in the morning.

This was over two months ago, and not yet has that man knocked on my door to swab my PMQ.

I have no insulation. When I had a leak in my bathroom, the person who opened up the wall told me I had no insulation. We were staring at the brick wall on the exterior of my PMQ.

However, I don't, as of this point, get an insulation rebate, and I now have been informed that I am never going to get one. However, my oil costs me $1,200 a year. I'm just supposed to come up with this money. My hydro costs me over $100 a month because my furnace is running all the time. But nobody cares about this. It's, “Oh, you got a 3.1% raise; jump up and down and be happy. After your rent goes up, you're going to have $6 more a month”. That doesn't even buy me diapers.

Anyway, I've beaten that to death. Let's move along.

Field time. We've heard how hard it is for people who go on UN tours, and I agree; I'm sure it's very difficult for them. I wouldn't know; my husband's begged three times and never been sent. I hear it's difficult for the people who go. They keep saying they want a break, but his unit has never gone. Maybe you should send some of them for a change.

He is out in the field eight months of the year. Maybe once every six weeks he'll get a weekend in or a night for a shower. Then he comes home at 10 p.m. and leaves at 4 a.m. This I'm supposed to be happy with.

As the gentleman said, he gets a whopping $6 a day for this. It's eight months—eight months—that my kids don't see their father, except for one weekend now and then. It may not be a tour, but it's a lot of time.

Medical expenses. We're from Vancouver. I have a daughter who was never sick. She was two and a half years old when we moved here, and I hadn't had to fill one prescription for her. In the last four months I've spent more than $200 on her. She has been sick non-stop since we've moved here.

My son is 19 months old.... I'm sorry.

A voice: These medical doctors at the Oromocto public hospital are telling all of us in regard to our children that these medical problems are because of how we live in the Atlantic region. It's time that these people compensate us. Somebody has to help these children. They're our future. They're your future. They're the future of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Voices: Hear, hear.

Ms. Lee Mawhinney: I may look nice right now, all dressed up, but my whole outfit, including my shoes, cost me $15. They came from a damage rack. I can't afford to buy my kids clothes. Luckily, my husband's father and mother have enough to clothe my kids. I can't afford to clothe them.

I don't have any money for anything. The day after pay day, I have 60¢ in my account to maybe cover a service charge.

• 2015

When we moved here, my husband was a private. We were making a double income in Vancouver. We moved out here, and because of a screw-up in the pay office—which is very common—we were making $305 twice a month, and we had a $300 loan payment. Out of that $300, I was expected to clothe, feed, and provide for my family, and pay my bills. I'd like to know any one of you who can provide for your family on $300 a month.

As I said, my children incurred medical expenses. I truly believe that there should be a clinic at least twice a week on the base where we can get free prescriptions, because we can't afford them.

My husband works on old equipment. It's so old that it's hazardous. They keep getting promised they're going to get new equipment. They never get it. It's just like the clothes of a soldier: his Gerber doesn't cover his hind end.

He has been told to go buy combats. That was in an article in the paper here. You get a clothing allowance, so buy yourself some new combats. He's common-sized. He has an average shoe size. They don't have any his size. If he wants a shirt, he can get one that maybe comes to here and does up around his top. The soles of his combats are almost worn out, but they don't have any more his size. What's he supposed to do? You can see through them when you hold them up to the light.

I have another issue. As I said, I'm from the west coast, and as you all know, I get paid squat. It costs me more than $3,000 to fly home. I've tried to get a flip. It's damn near impossible. In fact, I had one before my son was born, and I guess I'm supposed to be grateful for that for the rest of my husband's military career because they basically told him that his rank doesn't qualify for another one.

The only reason that my family has seen my son, who is 19 months old, is because his parents paid to fly us out two years ago. I don't see any reason why when I'm posted more than 5,600 kilometres away from home, they can't pay to put me on a flip once a year.

That's about it. I think that pretty much covers every little bitch I have. Thank you.

Voices: Hear, hear.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Colleen Huckstep.

Ms. Colleen Huckstep (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman and honourable members, I have a lot of issues myself.

First I would like to address the issue of PMQ housing. When CFHA took over the PMQs, they undertook some major problems. Most of the PMQs have never received major renovations since being built in the 1950s.

CFHA is not perfect, nor can anyone expect it to do all the necessary repairs immediately. All of us must work together in order that all these repairs are done in a timely fashion. These women who are living in deplorable conditions should be treated first.

CFHA recently tendered a contract to replace windows, doors, and siding on Hazen Crescent and Mackenzie Avenue. People were talking about this as cosmetic. I agree. The contract went to Defence Construction Canada, which I'm not very familiar with, but I assume it's a military body of some sort because they're on the base.

I have repeatedly telephoned Defence Construction Canada while this construction was being done. I was in Ottawa before my husband was posted here in 1995 working for a construction company at a salary of more than $40,000 a year. I know when things are being done properly and when they're not. I have asked Mr. Dave Powell on more than one occasion to please come and witness the lack of quality workmanship.

• 2020

Those tax dollars that are being spent are ours, they're yours, they're the country's, and they're being wasted. Perhaps in future, inspectors could maybe pop out once or twice a week, unannounced, to see what kind of work is being done.

I have a beautiful steel door on the rear of my PMQ that's hung at probably a 45-degree angle—wrong. We have brand-new aluminum doors. They look beautiful. The only problem is, you can't get in or out; the handles don't work.

The other thing about housing is why are we segregated at CTC Gagetown? I come from Ottawa. I was born and raised there. We lived in the PMQs among officers right down to privates. When you come home from work, you take off your uniform; you are not Master Warrant Officer Smith.

I know for a fact, because I have gone and seen them, there are PMQs on this base that are simply allocated to officers, in which these people who are living in deplorable conditions could live. I tried to get into one myself. It has been empty since May 1996. It is still empty. I tell you, any one of these women would welcome the chance to live there. Unfortunately, it's on the street where the officers live.

One of the greatest experiences of my life was living next door to a man who was a master warrant officer. He was slightly older than me. He was more of a grandfather type. I think my children benefited from that. We're away from our families; we're away from our long-term friends. These people respect them; they have time for them. Their children are grown and gone, in most cases, and they take the time to talk to little Johnnie or Sue.

Another issue I want to address is double-dipping. One person in particular on this base—and I won't mention names—is a retired major from the armed forces. He earns $3,000 a month pension. He is in a management position making $42,000-plus, plus his $3,000-a-month pension, and he's a reserve member of the forces in an officer position. That, to me, is double-dipping.

When the members go before the career manager, they are told you must bring a copy of your 490, which includes all pertinent information about where they've been posted, how many dependants they have, and all this. My husband went to great lengths to get this 490 before he saw his career manager in Ottawa. He said “Excuse me, corporal”—at the time, he was a new corporal—“you are being posted to Esquimalt”. He said “Sir, with all due respect, I have a wife and five children. We have corporals living out there with two kids on welfare. Please, can you not help me out?”

It cost the military an astronomical amount of money to post my family here, with five kids, from Ottawa, when they could have posted me to Petawawa at a cheaper rate, where we wanted to go.

My husband is very proud. If anybody wants to come and see our house, there's no problem. He has the picture of the Queen outside our bedroom door with a couple of flags. We have to salute before we go to bed.

I am a very strong person and I am very outspoken, and my husband's career has suffered because of it. Since he came here in 1995, his PERs, his performance evaluations, have gone in the toilet. He has been verbally abused at work by his co-workers and been told, “Keep your wife quiet”.

• 2025

You can look on my husband's PERs, right here and now. It says he has not learned anything since he came here in 1995, and as a matter of fact, he's doing his job worse. That, to me, is a reflection on each and every person up the chain of command in his department.

When we were posted here, we came here with the intention of being proud about his serving his country. I have a lot of pride in him. We asked for a compassionate posting to go back. We did that because of the financial aspect. We were doing okay in Ottawa. He was a private there, and we had five kids. We seemed to manage okay.

Then, when we come here, he's a corporal, our rent goes up, the oil goes up, the hydro and everything goes up, and we can't manage. They tell us, “Go to your unit and ask for help”. We did. Guess what? He's an administrative burden. They want to put him out.

We moved from one PMQ to another in order to drop our rent and to try to show the Canadian army we were willing to go that extra mile for them. We're a large family, with five kids, two adults. We moved from a half double to a row house. We have done our part. We went from a van to a five-passenger car. We can't even go anywhere as a family, never mind travelling home to see Mom and Dad. God forbid one of them should pass away, because we couldn't go all together. We don't have the vehicle.

We have tightened our belt as tight as it can go. Why are we an administrative burden? Why? I don't understand.

The other thing I'd like to address is AAA, or accommodation assistance allowance. It increases by rank. The higher the rank, the more AAA. Their reasoning is that the higher the rank, the higher the standard of living that must be maintained. Well, I'm here to tell you that a colonel living in Esquimalt with two kids doesn't need AAA. It's that poor corporal with two kids who needs AAA.

Voices: Hear, hear.

Ms. Colleen Huckstep: I have repeatedly gone to the Chief of the Defence Staff—and at the time, it was David Collenette's office—and spoken to somebody there. Her name was Deborah MacCulloch.

We were supported in our request to go back home. It wasn't because I missed my family. I'm very active here. I sit on SPAC, I'm a member of the Military Family Resource Centre as a volunteer, and I provide day care for five kids in my home to make ends meet. It was because we felt it was warranted for our financial situation.

Even though we were supported on the base by both the padre and the social worker, we never received a written response. I addressed the present Chief of Defence Staff at a meeting at the Military Family Resource Centre last summer, in June, and he was supposed to get back to us on our request. To this date, I still don't have it.

Thank you.

Voices: Hear, hear.

The Chairman: Thank you, Colleen.

Darlene Wahl.

Ms. Darlene Wahl (Individual Presentation): Hello.

Most things have been addressed so far this evening, but when I was reading the information that was put in my mailbox from the people who are now looking after our housing, there was one phrase that made me very nervous—that is, that they will adjust our rent “up to 25% of gross income”.

Now, what really made me a little bit nervous was “gross income”, because never before when we have gone to rent anything did we budget on our gross income. It's your disposable income that tells you how much you can afford to rent and where you're going to buy. Tied in with that as well was the fact, why are they privy? They're not our employers. Why are they privy to the wage?

• 2030

My PMQ is really awful, but I'm not going to say anything about it, because when I heard what some of these ladies are living in, I really can't complain. I'm cold, but that's it.

My major concern is the fact that we are a captive audience. We have no choice. We're posted here, and I'm afraid the PMQs available to us that used to be a little bit protected will go up to 25%.

I did a little bit of math, and on a $30,000 income, they take one-third tax off the top. They'll take 25% off the top. If they do it on the gross income, it changes your rent from $5,000 a year to $7,500 a year. That immediately makes it over $200 a month difference.

I don't really know what a corporal makes, but I figure there are a lot of privates and a lot of corporals. That's what makes the forces go around. So I just took a stab at a $30,000 wage. I did the one-third for the taxes, 25% for rent, and if they live in my house, it doesn't matter what rank you are, it costs you $120 average for your electricity and $100 a month to heat.

On a $30,000 wage, with those, I calculate if you're really careful—this is eating a lot of stews and a lot of homemade soups—you can feed your family on $75 a week. I figured out that someone who has that wage, before they pay the telephone, before they buy shoes, before they do anything, pay life insurance and house insurance—they won't own a car, guaranteed, so this doesn't include car insurance—has $171 every two weeks disposable income, and from that you pay everything, all insurance, everything. How can they do anything?

What really, really bothers me.... I'm so blessed that I'm not in a position where I really have to worry, but what really hurts is when the bulk of our members have to come to something like this and say that we're worth it. People strike, people have other ways of doing it, but the military is very disciplined. As a rule, they don't make waves because they are disciplined, and I think it's a very sad commentary that people have to come to something like this just to have a decent lifestyle and say “Please feed my children”. I think that's really sad.

The Chairman: Ms. Wahl, could you come back to the microphone, please? Mr. Richardson has a question.

Mr. John Richardson: I certainly enjoyed your presentation—

Ms. Darlene Wahl: Thank you.

Mr. John Richardson: But something in your presentation struck a funnybone. That was, how did someone get such private information as your gross income?

Ms. Darlene Wahl: I don't know. How can they?

Mr. John Richardson: Was this from the housing association?

Ms. Darlene Wall: Yes, it was.

Mr. John Richardson: Did they have that information?

Ms. Darlene Wahl: That was in my mail from our housing to tell us that my rent will be according to my husband's gross income. That's scary. They shouldn't be privy to anything like that.

But what I really would like you guys to do is to just slam the door on that gross income, because if they go gross income—

Mr. John Richardson: I can see that—

Ms. Darlene Wahl: —there are going to be people here in big trouble.

Mr. John Richardson: But I also want to slam the door on private information.

Ms. Darlene Wahl: Thank you very much.

• 2035

The Chairman: Melinda Kiah, please.

Ms. Melinda Kiah (Individual Presentation): Hi.

I was told I had to give my last name or I wouldn't be allowed to come up here. I was promised it wouldn't affect my husband, so I'm hoping it works that way. I don't want him called in front of his CO and told to get a grip on his wife.

A voice: Hear, hear!

Ms. Melinda Kiah: When you're posted, the army gives you a month's pay. They take the 42% bang right off the bat, fine. I'm very curious about why it ends up on my taxes that same year. You've already taxed me 42% on it and then I get it again.

Then they give me money for food and hotels, and that amount gets put on to my taxes, which bumps me up another frigging tax bracket. I owe money, more than I got for the posting, and I no longer get a child tax benefit. Explain to my two sons and two daughters that they can't play soccer or baseball because the army was nice enough to give us money so we didn't have to sleep in our car and we could eat while we were being moved. That's just absolutely ridiculous.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Ms. Melinda Kiah: Another thing that is extremely annoying is you come here and you have to have a credit check to have heat!

Voices: Hear, hear!

Ms. Melinda Kiah: Apparently it's some kind of luxury to heat your house and keep your children warm. Any other place we've lived, you don't require that.

A voice: You have to pay a deposit of $100 for your phone and $200 for the hydro.

Ms. Melinda Kiah: It's bad enough that Irving owns this province to the point where we can't get natural gas in here. We paid $40 a month last year in Borden, Ontario for gas heat. We now have to get half a tank of oil. We don't have an option. If I have $100 that I can put in a tank, I can't do that. I have to get $200 worth or they won't even give me oil. Who cares that my four kids are going to freeze their asses off! That's just ridiculous.

I understand these people are scared they won't get their money, but I'm sure with Housing, something could be worked out, especially military. You can't not pay someone, because holy shit, you are going to be in front of that CO so fast your head's going to spin. So maybe they could work something out with the oil companies to let us do a payment plan for a change.

A voice: You can get that if you have good credit.

Ms. Melinda Kiah: Yes, if you have good credit. If you've had any screw-ups, game over; you don't get a payment plan.

A voice: Once you bounce a cheque, not one oil company will even look at you.

A voice: And sometimes bounced cheques happen because the pay office forgets to pay us.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Ms. Melinda Kiah: I'm going to go to the PMQ issue again. I don't care how much it's been beaten.

We're being charged for basements as storage. Our damn furnace is down in that basement.

A voice: And the washer and dryer.

Ms. Melinda Kiah: Yes, but with what is spewing out of my furnace, do I really want to store my children's clothing that they're going to wear, let alone the water pouring in and ruining them?

Housing just has to get a grip.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Ms. Melinda Kiah: I go in and they tell me I have to buy a certain fence and it has to be a certain size and a certain colour. I can't put it on one spot on the property I'm paying almost $500 a month for now in rent. It has to go where they want it or they will come and make me tear it down. God, I wouldn't want to keep my children safe!

They tell me I can't dig up an area for a garden. I don't care that the base has plots. You have to pay for them. And when my husband's out in the field, can I always get onto the base to go and work on my garden? Not at all.

A voice: And they tell you what to plant anyway.

Ms. Melinda Kiah: As long as I leave my property the way it was, that should be the way it happens. If I want to put a garden there so I can actually afford to feed my children healthy for a change, that should happen.

I'm going to piss someone off here. I know I am. I wasn't going to bring this up, but I took extreme offence to the comment that the RCMP and us are like apples and oranges. That's just absolute bullshit.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Ms. Melinda Kiah: I'd like to know how many RCMP have lost their lives. I'm not saying it's not a good job, because trust me, my father's an OPP, and I thank God for every day he comes home off his shift and he's alive. But at the same time, you tell me how many RCMP have lost their lives in the past six to seven years, while we've been over in Yugoslavia and 13 soldiers have lost their lives, not even mentioning the wounds and everything else.

That's it.

Voices: Hear, hear!

• 2040

The Chairman: Thank you, Melinda.

Ms. Melinda Kiah: You're welcome.

The Chairman: Sylvie Fréchette.

[Translation]

Ms. Sylvie Fréchette (on her own behalf): Good evening. I would specially like to speak of children. Here, we have a French school. That is fine. But when I change provinces, I do not know if it will be all right. I do not know if my children will be penalized. I have no idea in what situation they will be the next time. If I go to Manitoba, will my children get the same education as here? I do not think so. No two provinces have the same education system.

Our children are destabilized enough by changes in postings, loss of friends, etc. Could they not have a program that would be extended to all locations in Canada? I am not asking this for locations outside the country, but at least for locations here, in Canada. I wish there were a special program for them, so that, when they go to another province, they would not be penalized, and they would not have remedial problems, as several of them have.

We have to get information on the program that exists in another province. We are asked if the child has learned this or that. If he has not, I will have to work all summer with my child if I do not want him to fall behind, if I want him to keep up with the others. I do not think my child is interested in working all summer to catch up with the friends he will make on our next posting. I do not think he will be interested.

I am a Francophone. I understand English very well. I sometimes have a little trouble expressing myself in English. This causes me certain problems. I cannot take courses here in French. If I want to take a course, I have to go to Moncton or Bathurst. I cannot afford to rent an apartment to take university courses in Moncton. I therefore take correspondence courses.

I received a survey from the Family Resources Centre, a questionnaire asking if we are interested in taking university courses on the base. Yes, I am interested, but in my own language. The only courses available now are in English. Francophones are on their own. Computering courses are offered in English. If we want to have them in French, we must go elsewhere.

I believe many people spoke tonight of PMQ's. I have an additional problem because I am a Francophone.

I had many problems from the very beginning of the implementation of the Canadian Forces Housing Agency. I am a woman, I am a Francophone, and I am not a military. It is my husband who is a military. I return from a trip to Québec, and I find my basement flooded. What do I do. The CFHA has just been set up. I call. When they come, the water is gone, yes, but it is obvious that there was water. I am told to call again when it comes back.

When the water came back, we called again. They came to see, and indeed, the water was coming in by the window. We were told that a contractor would be called in. The contractor came and said that he could not do anything, because the ground was frozen. We had to wait till the snow finished melting. Yes! In the meantime, all I had to do was soak up the water that was coming into the basement.

The snow melted, and I called them back. The equipment could not reach the site, because the ground was too soft. We had to wait a little more. Summer came. There is a heavy shower. The water is coming into my basement. I call them. They do not take my word over the telephone. I am told that someone will come and see if the water is really coming into the basement.

Yes, indeed, water is coming into the basement. Something must be done. It has been like this since March, and we are in June. I ask them if they are going to do something. Yes, the contractor will probably come.

• 2045

When the contractor came, in July,... I had been told since March that the contract had been given to a contractor, but that he was always held back because of the weather, the condition of the ground, of the snow, etc. In July, he tells my that he got the contract a week ago, because it was expected that thawing would solve the problem. If it had not rained during the summer, if the water had not come into my basement during the summer, I would have had the same problem when the snow would have melted the following year. I was lucky that the water came into my basement again, otherwise I would have had the same problem this spring; I would have had water in my basement again.

Very well. My problem has been solved. But you have no idea what I had to put up with. I am a Francophone. I had trouble getting service in French there. It is supposed to be bilingual. There were no signs in French. Now, I think they were a bit rapped over the knuckles, and there are signs in both languages.

I am a woman, and I was treated as if I were nothing. I had to bring my husband to the office to get service. I had to use my husband's rank and position to solve my problems. I would not want to be in the shoes of a poor Private without my husband's rank and position. I am sure that my basement would not be fixed. I am sure that I would still have water in my basement.

Yes, they have reason to quarrel over ranks; yes, they have reason to envy officers. They get things because they have a rank. They are more prominent. If my husband had been a Private, I would still have water in my basement. This is something I cannot accept. I am embarrassed when I have to say that my husband is an officer. Yet, I should not be. I should not be embarrassed to say what street I live on. I will not say it, because I know I will be judged by the others.

It is so hard to make friends. As soon as they know I am the wife of an officer, it is over, they do not speak to me anymore. Why is this? Because there are differences in the way we are treated. This should not be, specially in PMQ's. There should not be any special treatment just because my husband is an officer. There should not be any special treatment just because my husband has a good position. On the contrary, it is the Privates who should have a special treatment.

Voices: Bravo!

Ms. Sylvie Fréchette: When my children's friends learn that their father is an officer, they are treated differently. At school, because the school is in the PMQ area, my children are treated differently by the teachers because they know my husband is an officer. Why? This should not be.

There is another thing about schools. Teachers do not know what kind of life the military have. They have fund-raising campaigns and say that the other members of the family should be visited. My family is in Québec City. Can I finance school activities by selling around our place? No, because all children try to sell on the streets.

Teachers also do not understand that my daughter has mood swings for a month. Well, her father has been gone for two months.

The teachers here, where schools are mostly attended by children of military, need to be made aware. They need to be made aware of the fact that, when our spouses must leave, our children are affected. Yes, our children have behaviour problems. They have to move to five or six places during their short lives, and they loose all their friends. Our children have socialization problems, and that is understandable; every time they make friends, they loose them.

You cannot imagine what kind of fits our children have when we are transferred; fits of crying because they have to leave their friends.

• 2050

Our children develop a special skill, that of making friends quickly. But these friendships are never strong friendships like other children might have. I am sure that all of you can remember a childhood friend whom you may still see today. For our children, this is impossible.

I hope that all I said will have made you see a point of view, specially the point of view of a Francophone, because I have problems getting service in French in this area.

I also hope this will be considered for Anglophones who might be posted at Valcartier, as they, too, could experience problems. Our spouses have no choice; they must be bilingual. But their dependents may or may not choose to be. I would also like this to be considered.

Thank you.

The Chairman: There are no questions, Ms. Fréchette. Thank you very much.

Louise McCance.

[English]

Ms. Louise McCance (Individual Presentation): Good evening.

I guess we've beaten the housing issue to death, but I'm going to talk about it again, unfortunately.

I'm living in a PMQ that I have to live in. We took it last year for medical reasons. I injured myself working for $5.25 an hour. Unfortunately, I can't get anything else but that. As a janitor, I injured myself. I am not qualified for compensation or anything else, but I have been told by doctors to get a job that I can use my head at.

Is there anything out there for me? I don't think so.

We took a bungalow because I can't lift and climb stairs, and now our rent has gone up. It's not fair to us. My husband gets a raise and they take more than the raise. As the other lady said, they tell us where and how we can put up our fences. They can come and inspect our fences and tell us when to do maintenance to them, and tell us whether or not to take them down or put them up, but they don't want to come in and do the work to our PMQs that needs to be done to make them satisfactory and comfortable to live in.

Do you know what it's like to get up in the morning and shiver and shake? You put on three or four pairs of socks, two or three pairs of sweatpants, three or four sweaters. You turn your heat to 25 degrees and you're still cold. You walk by your door and a gust of wind goes by you. Come on; give me a break.

Our husbands are serving this country. They're doing the best they can, and they're getting the shitty end of the stick of it, too.

You know what my husband said? He said “Watch yourself, and be careful what you say”. I said “Sorry, but I didn't sign the contract to the military; you did.” I have the right to say what I want to say.

I was promised by Housing that I was going to get an air exchanger, but Oromocto Plumbing came back to me and told me I wasn't getting an air exchanger because I was taken off the list due to the fact that I had a little bit of insulation work done to my PMQ. But if you go in my bedroom and pull my clothes back from the wall, you'll see my clothes are full of mildew. I took a pair of dress shoes out of the closet the other day and I couldn't put them on. They were full of mould.

So it's ridiculous. I have no cupboard space.

But we accept all that. We know there are limitations to the PMQs. We know there are limitations to a lot of things, and we accept the fact that there's so much they can do and there's so little they can do, but, geez, give me a break; don't make them look pretty on the outside so that civilians think we, as the military, live high off the hog. Because guess again: we don't.

Do you guys sit down, take a notepad, every pay, and figure out what bill is going to be paid today and what bill isn't going to be paid today? Do I have $150 to give my husband when he goes away? Am I going to have $1,000, come March, to give my 16-year-old daughter—she right now is competing for the winter games—for the equipment she needs, or do I, as a parent, have to look at my daughter and say “I'm sorry, but I don't have the money to give you, because your father keeps having his pay taken away”?

I'm not going to disappoint my daughter. I will find a way, even if I have to stand on a bloody street corner.

Voices: Hear, hear.

Ms. Louise McCance: My daughter will go to the games, and I will find a way to be there, to watch my daughter compete, because it probably will be the only time I will get to see it.

• 2055

I have an 18 year-old at home, and he wants to join the military. From what I've seen and heard here tonight, I don't want my son to. He wants to go officer; maybe that's his best bet. And by God, if he does, I hope he has the gumption and the will behind him to do what he can do.

But you know something? The way I see our men treated, the way I've read that article in Maclean's that we, as spouses, are only valued at the price of a bloody toaster.... Is that all my life is worth that I sit here, and I stand behind my husband; I console him when he's down; I listen to him when he's angry; I say I'm sorry, honey, but I don't have $30 to give you this week for your tobacco; honey, I'm sorry, but we don't have the money for the gas; this is going to have to go unpaid because this is what we do have to do; we have to pay this oil bill, because if we don't, they're going to go to your CO; I'm afraid to write a cheque because it may bounce? It's not fair to us; it's an added burden onto the housewife. It's not fair to me; I feel like I'm an extra burden to him because I'm a medical problem.

There are a lot of issues there that people just don't look at. I look at the fact that we struggle every day. And I've pushed and pushed my kids and said don't be in the same boat we're in; stay in school; get an education; do the best you can.

It is heartbreaking to see the way we are treated. My dad works in a sawmill. I went home yesterday for the first time since Christmas because I actually had the finances to go home, and I live only an hour from here. My mom's home is beautiful, and they've built it as time goes on, but they don't get a pay raise and have it taken away because their rent goes up.

It's not fair to us. I sit in my PMQ and my power surges; my TV is now green. I've asked housing to come in and check my wiring. I've asked housing to come in and give me three-prong plugs. I have about three three-prong plugs in my whole PMQ. So my power surges.

I pay $135 to $180 a month in power bills. Housing took the reading from NB Power, because NB Power put a special meter on my power last year and they said the surges were coming from within the Q. When my freezers go and my TV goes any further than what it is, who's going to replace them? Who is going to replace the food that is in my freezers?

Our husbands work hard. I've seen my husband for 20 minutes today. He came home out of the field for about 20 minutes—hi, honey; bye, honey; I love you, honey.

It hurts me when I go shopping and I look at things and I say I'd love to buy that for my husband. I feel guilty if I buy something for my kids, because I see he needs things and I need things, but my kids come first. My kids will not do without.

I have a 16-year-old and an 18-year-old, and they work all summer to pay their own school clothing. My 16-year-old works her butt off. Last year she Dicky Dee'd all summer—and that's not an easy job—to pay for her sports, which costs us $100 per sport, not including food and travelling.

They give things to us, but they take it away. Then they wonder why we're here tonight angry; they wonder why so many of us get so upset. At one time I used to be proud to say my husband is a corporal and he's in the military.

I have a great-aunt. My uncle died because he was in the war; he was in the military. He died crippled. His hands were humped; his feet were humped. And my great-aunt still thinks it's just the best thing in the world that my husband is in the military. We had a military wedding, and that's all she still talks about, but she doesn't know the ins and outs of how we live today.

You put plastic on your window and you watch it bow in as tight as it can bow. That is disgusting. You go to bed at night and you wake up in the morning and you have water stains on your ceiling from condensation. You go to bed at night into wet sheets because the house is so full of condensation that your bedding is wet; your couch is wet when you sit on it. You enjoy that!

You come in and look at my furniture, furniture that was nice at one point in time. Due to the fact that I have so much moisture in my PMQ, it's all coming unglued. But we don't have the money to go out and buy new furnishings, and nobody is going to give it to us. It frustrates me.

• 2100

I've checked with a lot of my neighbours, and everybody's rent is different. Nobody's rent went up the same. Like the other lady said, they do not have any right to know how much money my husband makes. That is privileged information.

Voices: Hear, hear!

The Chairman: Are you almost done, Mrs. McCance?

Ms. Louise McCance: Yes, I am. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Mireille Trudeau.

Ms. Mireille Trudeau (Individual Presentation): The first thing I'm going to say is that way back when, the first or second speaker said a lot of people were in fear of coming up, so they didn't come up. I haven't given you my real name now, my married name. I gave you my maiden name. I have so much mistrust that I don't believe coming forward would not mean a reprisal against my husband in some way.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Ms Mireille Trudeau: A lot of things were said here tonight, and I'm not going to be on those things again. I'm going to go to new issues.

One of the issues I have is mental health. I don't believe there's enough being done for the military members and their spouses on mental health issues. A solution to this problem, I believe, is a 1-800 number across Canada, across the board, for a response team that would be available for military members and their spouses. This would alleviate spouses not wanting to come forward maybe because of fear of reprisal from their unit. I believe there are a lot of women who don't want to contact the military in any way for help, whether it's with their relationship or their own personal goings on, or things going on with the member. They're afraid of it going against the member and his career.

I have personal experience with that. Unfortunately, my husband had to come home from a tour to take care of his family, myself and his child, and that continually plagues him whenever another tour comes up or even if he has to go away for a couple of months. Not once has one of the military people counselled us or come and asked my opinion on things when this affects us as a family. This mission that took place four or five years ago still plagues his career. We were told that having to come home early from a mission would in no way affect him, but it still keeps going on and on; it keeps being brought up.

This leads to the aspect of the value of the family. On one hand it's being said that we are a valued member, but when crunch comes to crunch, it's not being put into place, as that instance shows.

Another point of view is opinion. I do have some experience with the military, as I am an ex-military member. You are allowed to have an opinion; just don't voice it. If you voice your opinion too loudly, somebody might hear it who doesn't like it and then you'll be X-ed on.

As you heard this evening, this also counts for not only women but the spouse of the serving member. If they have too loud a voice, it also affects the serving member.

Third is financial counselling. I believe financial counselling should be required on entrance. It should be in the basic military package when the military member comes into the Canadian Armed Forces. They should be taught financial counselling, the whole ball of wax.

• 2105

When a member gets into the army, for the sake of convenience, I believe, the rent is deducted when they're a single member living in quarters. Anything that's owed to the military is deducted: rent, food, and lodging. So what comes after that is their bonus money. This, in my opinion, doesn't encourage any kind of financial learning process on the way.

Back to the point on the mental health issue, on return from a UN tour, there should be kind of re-entrance seminars for us. It should be more than what I've seen in the past, when as I think it was mentioned here earlier, you were all grouped in one area and someone asked if there were any problems. Everyone didn't want to jump up and say yes, there were problems.

We touched on pay and housing.

I'm going back to the family issue because I believe that more consideration should be given to the soldier. I don't mean more consideration, but he shouldn't be in any way hurt or lowered in stature or anything because he's a family man.

This happens. It might not happen in a written rule kind of way, but it happens in a subconscious way. There was an instance three or four years ago. I'm not saying it was right now. There were orders to attend a hockey game. Our family was really not into hockey and so on, and it took away from what I believed was our family time to be ordered to go to such a function.

I want to touch on this. My military experience was in the reserves. I want to touch a little bit on that aspect. When you work for the regular force as a reserve member, you take on a contract. There are A, B, and C contracts. The C contract is like you're entering into the regular force. The B contract is like you're getting a full day's wage and you have a period of time that you're serving this contract, which is six months to a year. I served 10 years in the reserves, and I worked on full-time contracts when we got posted to a certain base.

I suffered an illness that was partly caused through the military. My contract ended, and I was still not recovered from my illness. Because the contract ended, they said c'est la vie, see you later. I still had not recovered from my illness, so my choice then was to go get unemployment insurance. I was not entitled to workers' compensation, and there was no other kind of form of compensation in that matter.

Workers' compensation is 90% of your salary, I believe, and unemployment insurance is 55%. There was a difference in the gap there. When the situation is handled within the military, it shouldn't be just left such that your contract's over, see you.

Providing support. I believe this base does a pretty good job with the family resource centre and so on. But here's one of the aspects that I find is lacking a bit. I'm a working spouse, and a lot of the support is geared around spouses who stay at home. The military members and their spouses are changing in that aspect. I don't know what the percentage is now versus earlier, but I believe we're moving more to dual incomes than before.

• 2110

The day care situation was brought up once before. I'm going to put it into an example. You almost feel hostage to the day care situation going on in the area. There is a family resource centre day care, and I do not understand why a family resource day care centre that's subsidized by the military has prices that aren't competitive with or lower than those of the outside day care centres, and why we cannot provide a service to working people.

We're grateful for the services they provide, but the services they provide are for crunch situations, in between day cares, and mainly for stay-at-home moms who want to do errands and so on. It bothers me so much that this is subsidized but it's not subsidized for our benefit and the working spouse's benefit.

I believe there is still a lot of abuse of power going on within the military, from word of mouth and past experiences. Unfortunately, that abuse of power is one of the things that drove my spirit away. I had lots and lots of pride at being in the military, and that's one of the reasons why, when I was posted here, I decided I would not join again.

I have a suggestion about the report and how it can be distributed. I think even if a copy were given to every family resource centre, it would ensure the spouses would have an opportunity to go somewhere and not have to go onto the base and ask somebody on the base. Also there could be a copy for each base and they could distribute it within the base. That would be some kind of solution to that problem.

Also I believe it was brought up that morale has dropped 50% or more because bonuses of $4,000 were given to generals and above, and people are still struggling.

I have two more points really. One of the things I don't understand, and maybe it can be clarified, is every time there is a change of government there's new enthusiasm to change things within the military. I don't know how much thought goes into this and who makes these decisions. One of the ones I have specifically targeted in my mind is the clothing.

So many years ago we all had one uniform and then we changed to two separate uniforms and two separate colours. Now I think we're moving to a new colour again, or some other phase of colours together. They're wiping out the coloured camouflage now and going to something else.

How much money over the course of twenty years has been wasted on putting the three uniforms together, taking them apart and putting them back together? That could have been given in pay increases.

The last point I have to make is military members pay their provincial taxes and federal taxes, but when it comes to them being allowed to have medical services, they are only allowed to see the military doctors because of medical review boards, joint purposes and so on. That's fine when it's just certain problems.

• 2115

Let's say you want a chiropractor. You feel it's necessary. My husband is going to have to wait four to six months for someone to deem that it's necessary he go to a chiropractor. When my provincial government insurance or I as a spouse going through his military insurance.... I could easily get a chiropractor just like that. For example, I'm entitled to six massages a year to relieve stress. My husband can't go and claim six massages a year. He can't go to somebody in the military and ask if he can have his six massages. That's just an example. I'm allowed to claim, for stress reasons, six massages.

That's all I have to say.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Next is Mr. Vatché Arslanian.

Voices: Hear, hear.

The Chairman: Mr. Arslanian, I think we'll try to keep it as close to a five-minute presentation as possible, because we're running a little late.

Mr. Vatché Arslanian (Individual Presentation): No problem. Thanks very much for giving me this opportunity.

I am a retired military member, and I agree with most of what these gentlemen said. I have other capacities. I'm the councillor at large, and represent the military community at Oromocto's town council. What I'm going to tell you today are issues I've heard from my constituents.

The issue about the pay increase, again, I don't want to keep it long, but I think it's totally unacceptable that the soldiers will have a total pay freeze. They had a zero percent increase for the last seven years probably, and their increments were frozen too. At the same time, they were slapped with a rent increase. That's totally unacceptable, and something should be done about that. It should be stopped immediately.

My second issue is about employment insurance. A lot of the spouses have to quit their jobs when they are posted. When they come down here they apply for employment insurance. They're having, most of the time, very hard problems with the manpower centre or the employment centre or whatever you want to call it. Lots of people who sit there don't know the military, don't know how it works, and deny them benefits.

I think something should be done in that regard. Something should be put in the Employment Insurance Act so that if you're a military spouse and your husband is posted, you don't have to go to the board of referees and in front of the umpire and have it take one year to settle.

The military members themselves pay into employment insurance and they're not entitled to any benefits. Now, when serving your country, you should at least be even, not be penalized. In this case, they're getting penalized. I think something should be done in that regard also.

My last point, Mr. Chairman, is about the DVA. So far, we have a couple of cases in this base involving soldiers who went to Yugoslavia in 1993. They got injured, and one of them I know for a fact has been three years through appeals, and that's totally unacceptable. I think that any person who goes on a UN posting—whatever, in the Golan Heights or in the Sinai or in Cyprus or in Bosnia—should automatically be considered a veteran, and not have to go through the legal mumbo jumbo and appeal after appeal to get their benefits. I think that's really a shame, and something should be done about that.

Those are my only three points. Thank you very much.

The Chairman: The problems the spouses have collecting EI—is that a widespread problem? Do a lot of people talk to you about it?

Mr. Vatché Arslanian: Yes. I am working helping three spouses presently. The problem, Mr. Chairman, is that lots of members of the board of referees have no military background. Even the employees of the manpower centre have no military background.

The Chairman: I don't understand why they would need a military background. If you have paid your weeks, and you can't find a job, you should be allowed to collect.

A voice: It's because they've had to quit.

The Chairman: Oh, they've quit. Okay.

Mr. Vatché Arslanian: It's because if the husband is posted, the wife has no choice but to quit the job and follow him.

The Chairman: Yes, that's right. We've had that problem before.

Mr. Hanger.

• 2120

Mr. Art Hanger: Sir, you are a councilman?

Mr. Vatché Arslanian: Yes.

Mr. Art Hanger: For the town?

Mr. Vatché Arslanian: Yes.

Mr. Art Hanger: And many of the base PMQs surround the town?

A voice: We are the town.

Mr. Art Hanger: You are the town. Okay.

A voice: Without us there wouldn't be a town.

Mr. Vatché Arslanian: Yes, this base is a unique base in that the PMQs are part of the town.

Mr. Art Hanger: Okay.

Mr. Vatché Arslanian: We share responsibility between the town—

Mr. Art Hanger: All right. What is the town's responsibility as far as the sewage and the sewer lines are concerned?

Voices: Oh, oh!

A voice: Don't go there.

Mr. Art Hanger: Too long?

Mr. Vatché Arslanian: That's an issue I've been working on, and we've had big problems with it.

Again, being in a town, it's like any bureaucracy: it tries to give bureaucratic answers. But the problem is that 50 PMQs in this town were flooded; 50 soldiers had their basements flooded. They lost lots of money.

The town, through the insurance company, didn't do anything for them, and neither did the provincial government. They couldn't qualify, because the provincial program is based on the federal program. You get the bare minimum.

So what we're doing now is putting claims to the crown. If you can unplug the ears of the Minister of National Defence to help them with it, we'd really appreciate it.

Mr. Art Hanger: Okay. Thank you.

A voice: CFHA didn't do much for those people.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, sir.

Mr. Vatché Arslanian: No problem.

A voice: Yay, Vatché.

Voices: Hear, hear!

The Chairman: Denise Laplante.

Ms. Denise Laplante (Individual Presentation): Hi.

I remember hearing a story years ago about a little nine-year-old boy whose father was in the American military. The family had just had their fourth child. This nine-year-old child committed suicide by hanging. His note told of the family financial problems. He felt they could not afford to feed another mouth, so he wanted to lighten the burden.

At the time, I remember thinking, thank God the Canadian army treats their soldiers and families better than that. I could not imagine a child feeling such a burden and such a financial pressure. I now see today some children and families in the Canadian army who are not so far off the pace.

I am the wife of a private. We have four wonderful children: two boys, seven and three; and two girls, eight months old. I am proud of my husband and his job, and he enjoys it. This is why we made this sacrifice, so that he could have a job he would be proud of. Should we, as a family, have to make such a big sacrifice? I don't think so.

We are a family of six. My husband's net income for last year was $21,000. His bring-home pay was $13,000. This is to feed and clothe six people and to pay hydro, phone, oil, insurance, cable, and other bills, not to mention the unexpected, such as car repairs and other things.

We live in a four-bedroom PMQ. Housing refused to pay for paint when we moved in, leaving us with a $300 bill to pay for orange paint, because that's the colour we have to use.

Our row has had two rats since Christmas, one as recently as a few weeks ago. We've had four feet of sewage in our basement. Three of the rooms in my house have leaks from the roof. My three-year-old thinks the ceiling is going to fall on his head and is afraid to sleep in his own room. This is a complaint I made months ago. We can actually see the light of day through my attic.

I was lucky enough to get casual employment, but the first questions in my interview were, “Are you military?” and “When will you be posted?” I decided to take the job, leaving my twins at the age of six weeks old, knowing that abuse among twins is nine times higher than with single infants. I was fortunate to find a good babysitter, but it was a heart-wrenching decision and something we had to do. We had no choice, because of my husband's low pay.

• 2125

Unfortunately, even spouses who need to work or would like to work are unable to find employment because of the military bias. The base here does not support employment of spouses. With the high cost of day care, some $2.50 an hour per child, it would leave me with $8.50 to pay for day care. Just getting a job at a convenience store would not cut it.

As of late, more mature men and women have been enlisting in the army. This is no longer the 18-year-old coming out of school with no responsibilities. They are men like my husband, with a spouse and four children. He is mature and responsible, with 16 years of previous work experience that counts for nothing. These are the men and women who are now enlisting.

With all these problems and challenges, would we still make the same decision to join the army? Yes, probably we would. Should we have to make such sacrifices and shoulder such burdens? I don't think so.

For all the parliamentary members, our men and women are the military, 24 and seven, always ready to serve. They leave their families for six months at a time, having their young children wondering who they are when they come home. They are as ready as the RCMP or the firefighters to put their lives on the line, and the rewards are few. Poor housing, poor pay, poor equipment and more—would you do that for $21,000 a year? I don't think so.

Voices: Hear, hear.

Ms. Denise Laplante: There are two other points I would like to make.

First, if this report gets shelved, you can be guaranteed that the morale of the military and their spouses will plummet, because now you are supposed to be listening to us, and if nothing is done, there's going to be no return.

As well, if nothing is done, it will be this government's responsibility. You won't be able to blame it on the last government. It's this government that's going to make the decision of whether or not to help us.

Voices: Hear, hear.

Ms. Denise Laplante: As I stated before, the fact that we have to have a committee to talk about our situation here speaks volumes in itself—really.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Carol Roy.

Ms. Carol Roy (Individual Presentation): Yes.

The Chairman: Go ahead, Ms. Roy.

Ms. Carol Roy: Gentlemen, I would like to start tonight by saying that when my husband gave me my engagement ring, he said to me, “I'm a 30-year man; you either like it now or you tell me now”. A year after we were married, I was talking to a colonel's wife. I asked her if she had any advice for a young wife in the armoured corps. She said “Yes, dear—run. Run now, and run fast.” I would like to find that lady now and ask if I could borrow her crystal ball, because she was right.

I can't believe that in the 13 years of our marriage the conditions have deteriorated so drastically. I'd really like to thank you gentlemen for coming into hostile territory tonight, as we all feel the government right now is the enemy. I just pray my comments don't fall on deaf ears and our taxes to have you here tonight aren't going to waste.

I'll try to be as brief and as eloquent as I can. I hope you gentlemen—and ma'am, I'm sorry—don't scare easily, because I'm going to tell you some horror stories.

When my girlfriend moved into her PMQ in Edmonton, she smelled natural gas. She called CFHA. CFHA said “Open your windows”. She opened her windows and called CFHA again. CFHA sent an inspector, who went around with a lighter, looking for natural gas leaks, and said “You don't have any natural gas leaks; open your window.” The lady called in an inspector from natural gas in Alberta, and he found five natural gas leaks in her PMQ, which I suppose were eventually fixed—I would hope.

• 2130

There was the great flood of March 1998. That evening, my basement started flooding. I called the emergency help line and I said “My basement is flooding; I need help.” They said “There's nothing we can do for you tonight; call CFHA in the morning.”

I called CFHA at 7.55 a.m. The line was busy. I called at 8 a.m. and at 8.05 a.m., at which time I finally got a gentleman who said “There's nothing I can do for you; besides, you're not paying for the basement anyway.” He told me to go and sit and have a coffee and calm down while I listened to the water flood my basement.

I didn't accept that. I got mad. Three cups of coffee and 20 minutes later, after pacing circles in my kitchen floor, I said I do not accept this, and I went in to CFHA. The best they could do was dirt to landscape the house in May. I said “It's flooding now; as we speak, I am losing the things that are in my basement.”

I went home and took it upon myself to try to stop the flooding. I went to Home Hardware and bought sandbags that I didn't have the money to buy, and I went out into the yard and left my six-year-old in the house by himself, to try to stop the flooding.

The rain and the melt overnight had produced so much ice, and 40-pound sandbags in water end up being about 80 pounds. I slipped on the ice and ended up with a fractured kneecap. I missed the edge of my brick house with my forehead by that much, and would have gone face first into a window well that was full of water and drowned.

CFHA would not lift a hand to help me. But my PMQ had been slated to be landscaped the prior fall. They knew there was a problem with my PMQ, but you know: “It got too late in the year, and there's nothing we can do, so we'll cross you off the list and you have to wait until next year.”

They landscaped my neighbour's house because they knew there was a problem. Good for my neighbour. But do you know where all the water went? My house. Two feet of water on three sides of my house.

Then I was told “Well, if you want to do it any sooner, there will be a drop of dirt, but you have to move it wheelbarrow by wheelbarrow yourself to your house.” I have called to make sure that my original order has been reissued to landscape the house, and to this day nobody has got back to me to say yes, Mrs. Roy, be calm, your house will be fixed.

I think I would like to nominate CFHA to take over Jean Chrétien's old job, as their expertise as politicians is extraordinary. You phone there and you get schmooze, and that's all you get. They should have a sign on the door that says “You bring us the beef; we give you the bull”.

They tell us that the basement is now going to be charged as storage space. When I phoned CFHA to ask about this, I said my basement leaks. Okay, well, we'll fix that. They said “You know, if you didn't have that storage space, you would have to go out and rent a unit to put your stuff in, so the little bit we're charging you extra for the basement you would have to be spending on a rental unit anyway.” I don't know of one person who keeps their washer and dryer in a rental unit off their property.

When we lived in Alberta, we were posted to Calgary and to Edmonton. I just want to say, off the top, we have had four postings in five years. When my husband saw the career mangler—I mean, manager—this year, he noted, “You guys are from the west”. I'm from Vancouver and my husband's from Vernon. He said “I guess you'll be wanting to get back there fairly soon”, and my husband said “For God's sake, leave us alone. We've had four postings in five years, we'd like to put down some roots.”

• 2135

We were in Edmonton for a grand total of 11 months because they shut down Calgary and the Strathconas were moved to Edmonton, and then they told my husband, by the way, you won't even be here a year; we're posting you to Gagetown. We tried to fight it. I am a senior legal assistant. I have a college degree and I can command $3,000 a month in wages. I cannot get a job out here because the first thing they ask you is how long are you going to be here, and what lawyer wants a secretary who's only going to be here for two or three years? Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, don't I have a right to work without being prejudiced? It's like somebody saying to me, “Are you Jewish? Are you black?” The next question is “Are you a military member?” They shouldn't have the right to ask me that question.

I have qualifications coming out my ears and I still can't get a job. I am now working part-time at Wal-Mart for $400 to $600 a month on a rotating 90-day temporary contract. That's the only employment, with my skills and my background, I could get—and I should be lucky I have it.

When we tried to fight the posting, my husband was told you can't fight postings. If you don't take the posting you'll be released, because you're a paperwork hassle. I ask you, any good businessman in today's society would not release an employee who was loyal, well-respected, educated, and is really good at his job and well-liked by his peers. What kind of good business decision is that, to let somebody go just because they won't take a posting? But that's what we were threatened with. You don't take this posting, you don't go.

I was self-employed. I had two shops in Edmonton that were taking my product. I was making a good living. We got posted out here anyway. We were told too bad, so sad, you go. We have never been poor until we were posted to this province.

Voices: Hear, hear.

Ms. Carol Roy: Every time you turn around in this province somebody has their hand out. Toll highways, garbage collection fees, you name it. Somebody's got their hand out, and I can't get a job at the wage I was making in Alberta. And we tried.

I would beg you gentlemen, after listening to you tonight talk about timeframes for your recommendations, to stick to your timeframes, because we can't wait any more. For us, time is up. That's it. We just can't wait any more. Please go back to Ottawa and tell them what you've heard.

For a brief moment I would like to step out of the good grace and manners that I was taught by my parents to have, and speak to contestant number 12 up there.

Before you pat yourself on the back for having so much integrity, quit treating us like two-year-olds. Cut the rhetoric. And don't think we don't see right through it. Stop and think about why we are so skeptical and hostile before jumping to defend yourself so quickly.

I am going to want to see some action out of you now, sir. I am going to remember your name.

Voices: Hear, hear.

Ms. Carol Roy: Mr. Pratt on the end, I would say to you, sir, what does your credibility in Parliament have to do with my inability to feed my children? Take a risk and recommend a real pay increase for us.

Voices: Hear, hear.

Ms. Carol Roy: I'd just like to finish the evening by reminding the committee that if every corporation in this country had such loyal employees who did what they were told when they were told, this country would hum like a well-oiled piece of machinery.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Mrs. Roy.

Captain Wolfgang Kirchner.

• 2140

Captain Wolfgang Kirchner (Individual Presentation): Good evening, sirs and madam.

I really don't know where to start, so I'm going to start off with the main reason why I'm here. It's basically my family.

The biggest problem I'm finding since I've been in the military is that I've gone on UN tours, and I was very fortunate, I did my UN tour with my unit. My unit had what we call “a rear party”. This rear party took care of things, such as removal of snow. If my wife had a problem with the furnace, whatever, my unit took care of her.

Since that time I haven't gone off on a UN tour, but I've had jobs where I've been on the road up to 200 days a year. Because of that, because I wasn't gone with my unit, my wife couldn't have that support she was entitled to, or what she had when I was at home with my unit. Therefore, she couldn't get the assistance she required if she had a problem in the home, or what have you, which meant that basically my wife was strapped to the house, with our children, and she had no means of any form of comfort, which included such things as paid day care. If she needed help cleaning up the house, or what have you, that wasn't offered to her. She had no viable option. She had no support network to help her out.

This was on an air force base, and I don't want to rip the air force in any way, because they have realized that fault and I think they're trying to take measures trying to fix it. But I think the basic problem we're running into is that the basic assistance that our families need when we're gone is only there when we're gone with a formal unit, off on a formal UN tour for a period of six months. It doesn't exist for our members who go off on a course for two to three months. It doesn't exist for individuals who go off because their jobs require them to travel quite a bit, just as you gentlemen and ladies are right now. There is no support network for our families in that situation.

Next, I'd like to move on to moves. Since 1993, my daughter has seen five houses. She is five years old. I've moved five times in the last five years.

The biggest problem I find with our postings is the famous posting allowance. Other branches of the government get posting grants, namely the RCMP, which is non-taxed. Why we, as military members, are taxed, I don't understand. If it's good for one branch of the government, it should be fair for all.

I came here from Valcartier in December. I got here, my furniture showed up December 23, so I was rushing trying to get my family in, trying to get the Christmas tree up for the kids and everything else. Right now, I'm still fighting trying to fix and trying to get money back for the furniture that the movers broke. And that's basically indicative of the same plight that Corporal Rice has, in the fact that we fight an uphill battle continually throughout our careers. If ever we have a problem, we are always wrong and we have to prove that they are wrong and that we are right. I don't think that should be the case.

That's the case when it comes to medical, it's the case when it comes to harassments, and it comes to the same point when we call about postings.

I should not have to go back to the insurance company and say look, if you look on your form reference, article 56, remember you broke this light, why aren't you accepting this now, but you're accepting something else that's on the same sheet? I don't think that I, as a military member, should have to fight these people to try to get my rights and try to get the furniture that they broke back.

Thirdly, I think I'm going to beat the dead horse some more about housing. The reason I'm going to is because when I left Valcartier, I left a three-bedroom PMQ with a garage. I was paying $575 a month for this PMQ. I was given six days from the time my posting message was given to me to the time that I actually moved here, not a lot of time. But CFHA faxed me a copy of my one and a half storey modified two-bedroom PMQ that I was going to occupy, because that was the only thing that was available, and the rent on this thing was only $360 a month. My wife and I looked at each other and said wow, this is great, we're going to save ourselves $200 a month in rent.

• 2145

When I got here on base, I found out that three months previous CFHA waved a big banner saying “By the way, guys, we have so many PMQs available, anybody who wants to upgrade can”. So now we have single people and parents with one child living in three-bedroom PMQs, either bungalows or full two-stories, and me, with two children, having been in the military now for 14 years, forced to fit into a modified two-bedroom PMQ. They call it a three-bedroom, but what they did is they took the dining room, closed the wall off, put a closet in, and called it a bedroom. So now I have no place to put my dining room furniture. My dining room furniture now fits in my—if I'm not mistaken—7.5 by 12 kitchen. I have a fridge, a stove, kitchen cabinets, and my table.

A voice: You can't put it in your basement.

Voices: Oh, oh!

Capt Wolfgang Kirchner: Exactly. I can't put it in my basement.

Which leads me to another piece of contention with CFHA. Whenever you buy a house in the civilian market, the basement is never included in the area. If they tell you your house is 1,200 square feet, it's 1,200 square feet of liveable space. You have a basement underneath, but that doesn't count. It's what's upstairs. With CFHA, when I got my initial PMQ, I wasn't getting a PMQ that was 1,300 square feet. I got a PMQ that was 840 square feet.

Oh, and one last piece of contention here: to give you an idea of how poorly these things are insulated, on average, since I've been in this PMQ, I've been spending $150 a month in electricity. In January alone, I paid more in heating oil than I did in rent.

I'm going to talk about military leadership, and the reason I'm going to talk about this is it affects you. You, as the political body, are the guys who dictate who our generals are. If you pick people based on their compliance rather than on their leadership skills, that's where we run into headaches, and that's what's happening.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Capt Wolfgang Kirchner: If we have the proper people in the job, things will happen.

I'm going to ask a question, and I'd like to see if you guys can answer this. Does anybody know, out of the last five or six Ministers of National Defence, who had actually spent time in the military? Anybody? None.

Therefore, if you're going to ask an ex-Minister of National Defence for advice, I would suggest that you perhaps ask ex-generals. If you'd like, I can give you a list of a few who probably would be better suited to actually giving you concrete suggestions on how to improve our lives.

I'm going to finish by saying I realize we have political parties in Canada and they're there for a reason. Your job here is you have a moral responsibility to us to fix what's wrong and put aside your differences and your political differences. What we need to start doing is having a mature political leadership rather than what I see on CPAC, where we have a bunch of individuals who deal with situations no better than my five-year-olds do.

Voices: Hear, hear!

Capt Wolfgang Kirchner: When we get to that point, we're going to sort things out a lot better. We're going to do what's right rather than what's politically correct, and we're going to find ourselves in a lot better situation.

Just a piece of info for everybody regarding natural gas in the province of New Brunswick: Mr. Irving has bought the rights and has bought all of the natural gas coming into the province, and he's also presently in the midst of getting the distribution rights for natural gas. If you're thinking of moving over to natural gas, don't bother, because we're all going to pay the same individual.

That's all I have, gentlemen, if you have any questions.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Captain.

Capt Wolfgang Kirchner: Thanks.

Voices: Hear, hear!

The Chairman: Shelley Knott.

Ms. Shelley Knott (Individual Presentation): It's a good thing you called me now. I'm running out of steam as the evening goes on. I had lots of steam earlier, when you were trying to read your little bit there from Housing.

My name is Shelley Knott and I am tired.

I'm a professional home economist. I have a degree that encompasses family studies, family economic issues, consumer studies, housing, etc. I moved into military housing last summer and got to know some people around. I started lobbying the government because I was appalled by the amount of poverty I saw, the amount of children who are doing without, and families that are in distress. So I started lobbying.

• 2150

I'd like to thank you, Mr. Hanger, for your office sending me many letters back, because I sent copies to you as well.

I lobbied the Honourable Art Eggleton to get on this committee, because as far as I'm concerned, if you're going to evaluate my quality of life then you better have somebody on there who has my qualifications in studying quality of life. I asked the government: why is there no home economist on this committee? Why are there no people on here who major in family studies? The honourable one answered me that they have families of their own.

Well, if that's the case and you're going to use your own standards and situations as the yardstick, then we have a problem. We have a big problem. I don't think that's right. I complained about it time and time again, and I'm going to keep lobbying.

I believe in the concept behind SCONDVA, but I do not believe in a committee that's composed solely of MPs. Please do not take this personally, but I believe that if you are going to assess an individual's quality of life, you better understand what you're looking at. You better understand it, because what you're going to put in that report is going to affect my life.

I'm a teacher who is out of work. I came here from B.C., and I have never been able to get a contract. There are many, many people on the supply list. So now I'm a maid. That's one of my jobs. I met the group of women who are sitting in here by helping a friend out and taking her little girl to play school.

I owe student loans, loads and loads and loads. I'm trying to pay that debt off. Right now, they saddled my husband with that debt. Isn't he lucky? He's paying for my education.

I want to touch upon the issue of health care. I have a huge problem with Sun Life, and I think you really need to put that in your report. You really need to understand that people cannot afford to pay the deductible. They cannot afford to pay for these prescriptions their children require as a direct result of the quality of housing. These people cannot afford to pay this deductible.

I have forked out $800 in the past week for my own vision problems. Believe you me, the glasses I picked out were not fancy, but they'll do the trick. They're my second pair in the past month. I have major, major vision problems. Luckily, my husband and I have no children, so we somehow found it. But Lee, the person you heard earlier, talked about wearing $15 stuff from the bargain shop. The amount of money she has spent on her own children for prescriptions, especially for son, is appalling. I cannot see how people are going to keep paying this deductible year in and year out.

I have a huge problems with Sun Life because they are so slow at processing, plus you pay this deductible. Some people aren't aware of this until they go and get glasses, they send in their receipt, and they expect to get a check back for whatever, but when they get it back, and it's nothing. Welcome to the world of the deductible.

I read a letter last week about the fringe benefits of the military. I'm here to tell you that we pay for it, and I do not think that we should be paying a deductible. That's all I'm going to say about health care.

In terms of housing, I once had my basement fill with smoke. I phoned the housing people, who basically told me to hang on until tomorrow. So I phoned my Dad up. He said that I had better phone somebody because he didn't want to see me burn in my bed.

So anyway, I finally got hold of the man who looks after the furnaces. Thank God I got the right one. He came and said he was going to do me a favour. He said he was going to rip my furnace apart and put a new burner in with all new insides

I thank God he did that, because we only spent about $600 this winter for oil for a two-bedroom bungalow, and that's pretty good. My poor friend spent $1,400 in oil to heat his house. You can see the heat going right out through the roof. It's sickening. I am so fortunate for that. Thank God that guy came and he did that to my furnace. I was almost willing to kiss him because he saved us so much money this winter.

I don't know how we would have lived. I'm out of work. I scrub people's toilet for money. I'm a maid. I'm an educated maid.

So that's what I want to say about housing. If that lady doesn't put in her resignation by the end of this week, I don't know what I'll do, but I'm going to keep lobbying, I'll tell you that. I'm not finished. I'm not finished at all.

• 2155

I want to talk about the issue of education in the military. I think we need to do more for men who are in for 20 years and who are thrown out on their ear. These people have no skills that are marketable. They are of no use to society, and they are a burden. They do not find work and they're expected to live on a piddling pension. We need to be doing more to educate them, to provide them with skills that will aid them in society.

I think you need to do more for spouses, too. There are many people out there who would like to upgrade their education. I'm fortunate enough to have a degree, but I'm not done. I'm going back to school, because I have to have an education big enough to support my husband when he's done. He's a corporal, and they don't want him after 20 years. They'd rather I get in as an officer—me, the home-ec guru—and stay in until I'm 55, when he's had 20 years' experience in.

That is a crock. You need to do more about the issue of education.

The question some of you may be asking when you hear people talk about having four and five children is, “Why are they having children?” Well, if you expect them to know about family planning, then you'd better educate them on it at work, and if you expect them to know about finances, you'd better educate them on that at work.

I think they should be offering finance courses. I took finance in university. I have a bit of a clue about finance, or I'd like to think I do, anyway. We manage to survive, and we're not in the hole. But I'll tell you one thing, for the people in this room complaining that they can't feed their family, you can only stretch a dollar so far.

I wrote to the honourable minister and talked about past surveys. All I was told was that they'd never done one this in-depth. Well, this is as in-depth as it gets when you have women crying and you start hearing about dirty laundry and all this.

Something had better come of this, because if we spend more money on surveys, I'm going to scream. How many more letters can I write? We had better do something with this survey, let me tell you.

If the next panel I see does not have a home economist or an individual with a family studies background, I'm going to freak and lose the noodle, because I'm sick to death of this. Sick to death. It's an insult to my intelligence and my university background for there not to be a home economist or someone with a family studies background on this committee.

Put that in your report, please.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Debbie Foley.

Ms. Debbie Foley (Individual Presentation): Good evening.

I served in the military for 12 years, from 1980 to 1991. I'm married to a military service member. He is a field engineer.

This base houses roughly 3,500 soldiers. To date we've had four come back in body bags from Yugo. I can't compare that with any salary in the civil service, and I'm getting kind of tired of hearing that because we make $38,000 a year, we should be happy.

I was in the military. I was posted in Ottawa. The cutbacks were horrific. There were supposed to be thirteen of us in a section and there were three of us, including an MWO and a corporal. All the civil servants who worked there were on stress leave, so we did their jobs plus our own. I worked under those conditions. I did BDFs for eight hours, I did my own military job for eight hours, I had a four-, three-, and two-year-old at home, and my husband was away for six months. I also paid $17,000 for day care in Ottawa.

They felt so terrible for me they posted me to Gagetown, because it was poverty-stricken. I thanked the military. I did. I said “Thank you very much, because I need this”. They didn't post my husband with me, so I came here as a single parent, to the infantry school, to pay day care about 20 hours a day, because I'm up at 4 a.m. working yet again in another section in which they only post people for two years because of the burn-out rate.

Of the administration clerks at the infantry school when I was there, not one is left in the military. In two years, five of us got out because of the stress level.

I see exactly the same thing happening to my husband. A girlfriend phone me the other day. She was so excited because they got two privates in their unit. She phoned me at home to tell me that.

There are more officers in units than there are privates. Ask anybody here; add up the officers in their units, from officer cadets right up to the CO, and there will be more of them in the units than there are privates.

• 2200

My husband comes home and tells me when they get corporals in his unit. He has 60 guys working underneath him, and 10 above him. The stress level of these guys is just tremendous. I hear every single day about all the people who parade through my husband's office stressed out, because there used to be 30 of them and now there are 3.

They rotate through UN tours like crazy, but we're thankful for UN tours because that's the only way we can get a decent pay. So I prefer to sit on my big fat butt on my couch hoping that my husband can rake in another $750 a month, because you can't get employment around here. There is a 24% unemployment rate in Oromocto.

If you take that and compare it to any other province in Canada, we are the most unemployed sitting here in Oromocto. The women here are highly educated, extremely employable, and we're thankful to get a 15-hour a week job at Tim Hortons for $5.25 an hour.

You come from provinces where you're making $40,000 to $50,000 a year. You come here, and are not even entitled to the full weeks of unemployment insurance. When you show up at the unemployment office, if you were unemployed in Ontario you'd get 52 weeks. If you come to New Brunswick you only get 40, because the unemployment rate is so high, and you should be thankful for that.

We're constantly, constantly trying to find employment. When I left the military, we were making $84,000 a year. I was a corporal, and married to a warrant officer at the time. We were in Ottawa, and foolishly bought a house. We lost our shirt on the house because the place was deflated.

I've owned four houses within five years at one point. I've had eight addresses in about six years. And I was thankful. I walked around with blinders on. I had no idea what these people were going through—none. Well, I tell you, you throw a $40,000 salary out the window and you learn in a hurry how you can stretch a dollar, if you can barely do it.

I would like every single one of you people to walk into Sobey's or Save Easy—I'm not being picky about which store you walk into—and go and buy a four-litre milk. Go and pick up some broccoli.

In Ottawa the richest we ever were was when I was out of the military on UI. I went back to Ottawa for eight months because I thought we were posted there. It turned out we were wrong, and we came back here. I was on UI, my husband was getting triple-A. There was a captain, anm MWO and a private. We were all living in the exact same house.

The captain got AAA so his rent of $575 a month was knocked down to $30O. We and the MWO got $120 so our rent was.... The corporal got $80 AAA. AAA certainly doesn't make sense. You don't need AAA in Ottawa. It's $575 for a PMQ. Your hydro in Ottawa is $59 every two months.

We actually bought a house because we cannot afford the hydro bill and the oil bills. The hydro bill—I phoned because there had to be something wrong. I was paying $125 just for my lights. I said, “You have to be mistaken. We both work, I have one kid, it's a two-bedroom bungalow. Are you guys nuts?” “Oh well, welcome to New Brunswick, ha ha ha”.

I thought, okay, maybe you're right, dual income, what do we care, we've got tons of money. And I thought that was for our heat as well, because we came from B.C. Well, I was in for a shocker when September hit. I found out I had to fill an oil furnace and then I found out about oil heat. So it's $350 to $400 a month to heat the second-smallest PMQ on the base. I went, “This is nuts. I'm going to go and buy a house.”

When I bought my house I bought a house six times bigger than my PMQ. My mortgage was $600 a month because I wanted to pay it off faster. My hydro bill was $80. So I don't know. There has to be something wrong with these PMQs. They're just terrible.

• 2205

None of this is what I wanted to talk about. What I wanted to tell you is after I got out of the military and I came back to Oromocto and I wanted to get a job there were none. You have women here who are highly educated. They have paid for their training through their nose and they come here and they'd be lucky to work at Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart around here, by the way, is considered a good job, at $5.25. So you have highly educated people.

Our government programs that we have for small business.... I own a small business, and I'm also the president of the chamber of commerce in Oromocto. And when I started looking for financing for a small business, I was turned down by two federal agencies because my husband was in the military. I was turned down by a national bank—because, I was told, my husband was in the military. I was turned down for two government programs. Two government programs turned me down because my husband was in the military.

So my husband goes over there. We've buried four of our friends in the past five years. We've had sixteen deaths. We have soldiers on this base who have no feet. Right now. Today. In fact, you probably saw them or heard from them in the last couple of days. And that same federal agency told me that because my husband is so unstable in his career we're not entitled to a guaranteed $10,000 loan to start a business.

So what I would like to see is some kind of funding put in place if women do want to start a business, because we certainly can't get a job. I'd rather sink $10,000 into a business than go and work for $5 an hour.

There's another thing happening in New Brunswick that you don't know about. The New Brunswick government, to make our life better, as employers, decided that they would.... I don't have all my facts, but basically it works out that you don't have to pay CPP and UIC if you have an employee for under 15 hours a week. So the women here, when they're talking about working, what they're talking about is getting a job at one of these stores that will allow them to work for 15 hours a week at minimum wage. That's $70 a week, and around here, with an unemployment rate of 24%, they go out and celebrate that fact.

Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Debra Barnett.

Ms. Debra Barnett (Individual Presentation): Actually, I had no intention of coming up here tonight, but I have to speak my mind. All of the issues I want to talk about have pretty well been covered.

To start off, my husband joined the military in 1990 after we had been married for eight years and we already had three children. He started out as a private. We knew what we were getting into but we figured there'd be some annual pay increases along the way. Boy, were we surprised.

Trying to raise kids, as the lady who spoke earlier noted, on a private's salary was extremely difficult. I was a regular member of the food bank. I still go there occasionally. As a matter of fact, I shop at the F&C boutique is what I call it, the food and clothing bank boutique. That's where my children and myself get our clothing because I can't afford to buy them anywhere.

My husband was deployed to the Golan Heights for a six-month tour in February 1996. The entire time he was there, nobody called or showed up to see how we were doing. Nobody cared. There was no rear party to take care of us. At that point we were living in our own home. I got so sick and tired of being told what to do and when to do it when we were living in the PMQs. We had the same problems that everybody has hashed out here tonight. They told us what colour to paint our fence. Not only that, we had to buy the paint. We had to have permission to plant flowers. I just said, “That's a hassle. There's no privacy. There's nothing. I want out.” So we bought our own home. It was a $65,000 home, nothing outrageous. On a corporal's salary we're barely managing.

• 2210

Anyway, after he got back from the Golan Heights, in August 1996, he was posted to Edmonton, two months later. We have three children. The kids and I are still here because we cannot sell the house.

I'm leaving next month. The house has been on the market for over two years. I have it listed for less than what we paid for it four years ago. I don't care if I have to declare bankruptcy; I am going to get my family back together. Two and a half years of being separated.... Oh, not to mention, the husband is allowed to come home once a year, and they pay for that trip. That's it, once a year.

My kids are now 15, 13, and almost 12 years old. They don't know who their father is. They haven't any idea.

When we first listed the house, we went through what they called a guaranteed home sale plan. I don't know if any of you are familiar with that. Well, they in turn contacted me—my husband had already been posted to Edmonton and he was in the field for five weeks—and they told me: “Oh, we can't get your permission to do this; we have to speak to your husband; he's the member of the military; he's the one who has to sign the paperwork.” My signature is on that mortgage paper as well. I guess I'm only the spouse; I don't count for anything.

A voice: You have the privilege of the toaster.

Ms. Debra Barnett: That's right.

They in turn said “We're going to have to get in contact with your husband”. I said “He's in Wainwright; he'll be there for five weeks; you have no way of contacting him.” I had no way of contacting him.

So what did they do? They let the time period go by and then came back to me and said “Oh, you no longer qualify for this because you didn't get back to us within the allotted time period”.

I've dropped the asking price of my home by almost 10%. We're losing, I'd say, close to $10,000, plus what we've put into the place. If it's not sold by June 1, I'm gone. We've already made arrangements. I'm going to Edmonton around June 8. I'm gone. I don't know what's going to happen after that, and to be quite honest, after all this time, I really don't care.

A couple of months ago my husband called me and said “I'm tired of this; I want the family back together.” I said “Why don't you put in for a compassionate posting?” He tried that. They told him, “Oh, well, your career is going to stall; it's not going to go anywhere.” He's a corporal in the military. His career is not worth a pinch of coon shit right now. They don't care. They turned it down.

They said “No, you're in Alberta; your wife and kids are in New Brunswick.” Both of our families are on Vancouver Island. “No, you can't have a compassionate posting; there are no grounds.”

He asked for an attached posting back here, just until the house was sold. That's it; that's all he wanted. They turned that down.

Ladies and gentlemen, I don't know what else to do, but I'm going to be reunited with my husband.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Ladies and gentlemen, I guess this brings our session to an end. I want to thank everyone for their input and also their patience this evening. Thank you very much. Good night.

The meeting is adjourned.