NDVA Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Wednesday, April 30, 2003

¹

1535

The Chair (Mr. David Pratt (Nepean—Carleton, Lib.))

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan (Minister of Veterans Affairs)

¹

1540

¹

1545

¹

1550

The Chair

Mr. Roy Bailey (Souris—Moose Mountain, Canadian Alliance)

¹

1555

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Roy Bailey

The Chair

Mr. Roy Bailey

º

1600

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Brian Ferguson (Assistant Deputy Minister, Veterans Services, Department of Veterans Affairs)

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

The Chair

Mr. Bob Wood (Nipissing, Lib.)

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Bob Wood

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Bob Wood

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Brian Ferguson

Mr. Bob Wood

Mr. Brian Ferguson

Mr. Bob Wood

º

1605

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Bob Wood

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Brian Ferguson

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Bob Wood

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Bob Wood

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Jack Stagg (Deputy Minister, Department of Veterans Affairs)

Mr. Bob Wood

The Chair

º

1610

Mrs. Elsie Wayne (Saint John, PC)

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mrs. Elsie Wayne

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mrs. Elsie Wayne

º

1615

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mrs. Elsie Wayne

The Chair

Mr. Robert Bertrand (Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, Lib.)

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Brian Ferguson

º

1620

Mr. Robert Bertrand

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Robert Bertrand

The Chair

Mr. Leon Benoit (Lakeland, Canadian Alliance)

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Leon Benoit

º

1625

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

The Chair

Mr. Bob Wood

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Bob Wood

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Brian Ferguson

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Bob Wood

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Bob Wood

º

1630

Mr. Victor Marchand (Acting Chair, Veterans Review & Appeal Board)

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Bob Wood

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

The Chair

Mrs. Elsie Wayne

º

1635

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mrs. Elsie Wayne

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mrs. Elsie Wayne

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mrs. Elsie Wayne

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mrs. Elsie Wayne

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Jack Stagg

Mrs. Elsie Wayne

The Chair

Mr. Ivan Grose (Oshawa, Lib.)

º

1640

The Chair

Mr. Leon Benoit

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Leon Benoit

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Leon Benoit

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Leon Benoit

º

1645

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Leon Benoit

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

The Chair

Mr. Robert Bertrand

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Jack Stagg

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

The Chair

Mr. Bob Wood

º

1650

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Ms. Verna Bruce (Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Veterans Affairs)

Mr. Brian Ferguson

Mr. Bob Wood

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

The Chair

Mr. Ivan Grose

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Ivan Grose

The Chair

º

1655

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Jack Stagg

Mr. Brian Ferguson

The Chair

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

The Chair

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

The Chair

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

»

1700

Ms. Verna Bruce

The Chair

Ms. Verna Bruce

The Chair

Ms. Verna Bruce

The Chair

Mrs. Elsie Wayne

The Chair

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

Mr. Brian Ferguson

The Chair

»

1705

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

The Chair

Hon. Rey Pagtakhan

The Chair

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs

---

NUMBER 024

l

2nd SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Wednesday, April 30, 2003

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

¹  (1535)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mr. David Pratt (Nepean—Carleton, Lib.)): Ladies and gentlemen, I call this meeting of the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs to order.

    We are very pleased to welcome before committee the Honourable Rey Pagtakhan, Minister of Veterans Affairs, to speak to us today about the estimates for his department. He is accompanied by a number of officials from the department and from the Veterans Appeal Board. To all of you, welcome. Because I know, Minister, there are going to be a fair number of questions directed to you, let's get to your statement right away. We look forward to hearing your remarks.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, bonjour.

    Allow me first to congratulate you, Mr. Chairman, on your re-election. May I also congratulate the two vice-chairpersons and the new members, as well as those who have decided to stay on from the previous life of this committee.

    An entire year has gone by since I met with your committee for the very first time to discuss last year's main estimates. Of course, I also met with your subcommittee on Veterans Affairs here in Ottawa, and earlier this month you met with my officials in Charlottetown. We appreciate these opportunities to keep you abreast of our many exciting initiatives, and we value your continued interest in ensuring that veterans receive high-quality services and benefits.

    At this juncture I would like to introduce you to the officials who are here with me today. As you may know, our previous deputy minister, Mr. Larry Murray, moved over to the challenges of Fisheries and Oceans as of April 22. Larry's shoes will be tough ones to fill. I have every confidence that our new deputy, Dr. Jack Stagg, is the man for the job. He holds a doctorate in history from Cambridge University and brings to the portfolio a wealth of experience, with almost 30 years in federal public service, in the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Fisheries and Oceans, and most recently as Deputy Minister of Indian Residential Schools Resolution Canada. May I add, Mr. Chairman, that it is of interest to all of us that both of deputy Stagg's parents are veterans. Most certainly, I look forward to working with him and his team of officials in delivering the best services to Canadian Forces veterans. I'm also pleased to have with me Mr. Victor Marchand, chairman of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, Madam Verna Bruce, Associate Deputy Minister, Mr. Brian Ferguson, Assistant Deputy Minister, Veterans Services, and Mr. Robert Hamilton, director general, Financial Services.

    Two months ago the subcommittee received a departmental briefing. I will not repeat what we said at that time, but I do have some new items to announce since we last met.

    Let me start with the dollar figures. I will speak to the big numbers, and upon conclusion of my opening remarks, I or my officials will answer any questions you may have about the details, which you have in front of you, the 2003-2004 estimates and report on plans and priorities. For 2003-2004 the portfolio is looking for approval for a total funding level of just under $2.5 billion. The bulk of that amount, 71.6%, relates to funding under our grant and contribution program. Just over $1.5 billion is allocated to disability pensions and $193 million to the veterans independence program. The health care we provide to veterans, primarily those items not covered under provincial health care plans, accounts for another 18%, $448,600,000, of the total. The remaining 10% or so covers the operating costs of the department, including the Veterans Review and Appeal Board and Ste. Anne's hospital.

    The budget increase of approximately $224 million over the last year can be attributed to increased pay-outs for disability pensions as a result of cost of living indexation, an increase in the attendance allowance awards, and an increase in the level and number of disabilities as clients age. Moreover, prescription drugs and hearing-related services and devices are getting more expensive, as are some of the VIP services, including home care and housekeeping.

    Those are the numbers in a nutshell. I will divide the remainder of my presentation on programs into three categories, service to war-era veterans, service to Canadian Forces veterans and still serving CF members, and the remembrance program.

    It should be no surprise to you that our focus for war veterans continues to be on long-term care and health needs. Our primary goal is for all eligible veterans to have access to quality care in or close to their home communities. This care is provided through the VIP or through institutional care as needed.

    Veterans independence program innovations certainly are important. Currently, more than 70,000 veterans and their spouses, almost one-third of our clientele, receive support under the VIP. This is significant, because the program allows veterans to remain at home longer with their families and avoid, as far as possible, institutionalization. As you know, the number one priority of veterans organizations is to extend VIP to survivors beyond the current one-year extension after the death of the veteran.

    Long-term care for veterans is a topic near and dear to the heart of this committee, and I respect the excellent work you have done on this subject. I share your concerns about the importance of long-term care, and that is why my department continues to ensure that when veterans can no longer manage at home and must move to a long-term care residence, they receive the very best of care. With more than 10,000 priority access beds, community and long-term care beds across the country, we continue to work very hard to make sure this happens. When necessary, we take on an active role in managing the waiting list for our long-term contract residences. I'm looking forward to the committee's forthcoming report based on its recent visits to a number of long-term care facilities across Canada.

    Of specific interest to you, I can report the following progress on the recommendations from your interim report “Long-Term Care for Veterans: The West Coast Crisis”. A partial funding agreement has been reached with the Lodge at Broadmead. We are working with them towards further agreements regarding dementia care and an expansion of the Veterans Health Centre. VAC has also provided additional funding to the George Derby Centre.

    Let me now address the subjects of infrastructure and health promotion projects. As you may know, our investment of $67.7 million will help Ste. Anne's Hospital and its staff to meet modern standards and to build upon its international reputation and considerable expertise in the specialized clinical care of the elderly. In addition, we have assisted and will continue to assist with projects to support veterans' needs in other contract facilities across the nation. Recent examples include Moncton, Fredericton, Saint John, Quebec City, Toronto, Winnipeg, Calgary, and Victoria.

    There are many health promotion projects we also have in the works. One is a substantial falls prevention project in collaboration with Health Canada. Another is a partnership with the Royal Canadian Legion to research and document housing issues in Canada. Third, we have a research project with the Victorian Order of Nurses on home and community care for all veterans and seniors.

    There are other issues that are not directly related to care, but are equally important, issues about fairness and equitable treatment for our war-era veterans.

    I come now to first nations veterans. You will recall that last June we announced a first nations veterans package to address these veterans' long-standing concerns about the way they were treated before and after the wars. This package, a one-time payment offer of up to $20,000 for each eligible first nations veteran, represents a Government of Canada commitment of up to $39 million. As of the February 15 deadline this year over 2000 applications have been received, compared to the anticipated 1800 eligible applicants. Today more than $10 million has been issued to approximately 500 first nations veterans.

¹  (1540)  

    The other matter concerns prisoner of war compensation. You will recall my announcement in the House late last year to resolve the case of Lieutenant-Colonel Al Trotter. Although he had been receiving the full benefits available to him under the current law, we decided to address his special circumstances by means of an ex gratia payment. My department has now undertaken a review of all prisoner of war files to ensure that every former prisoner of war or a surviving spouse in similar circumstances will receive the same consideration. Such consideration would amount to a tax-free payment of up to $20,000 each for those prisoners of war who were not aware of compensation benefits when they first became available. As of April 11 74 of them had received their payments.

    Let me now turn to our Canadian Forces veterans. Before getting into specifics, I would like to remind committee members that in 1998 VAC started to put more emphasis than had been put earlier on serving our Canadian Forces clients and forging a strong relationship with the Department of National Defence to serve our common client. Not coincidentally, that was also the year in which your committee published a report on the quality of life in the Canadian Forces. Your recommendations have played no small part in our evolution to meet the needs of our CF veterans and still serving CF members.

    I would like to announce today our new VAC transition services. This program will assist Canadian Forces members by providing on-site access to my department's services and programs at any time during their careers, and especially during their transition to civilian life. We are placing specially designated veterans affairs client service teams at 17 key Canadian Forces locations across the country. Members of these teams will deliver departmental services, act as liaison between my department and DND, and themselves become centres of expertise on CF client issues. This program formalizes a pilot project we began in 2001 and is aimed at ensuring that VAC strengthens its expertise and capacity to deliver high-quality services to our CF clients.

    As well, two weeks ago I went to Washington, D.C., to meet with my counterpart, Secretary of Veterans Anthony J. Principi, and his senior officials. It was a very useful meeting. We explored opportunities for sharing best practices with respect to helping military members with post-traumatic stress disorder make a successful transition to civilian life. The Americans have shared their extensive PTSD expertise with officials at my department, and I look forward to that continuing dialogue. Our American colleagues also have done a lot of work on peer family counselling, on screening tools for health professionals, and on education for social workers. Secretary Principi expressed an interest in a follow-up meeting with us here in Canada, and I'm actively pursuing this. Furthermore, experts from around the world will be attending a departmentally sponsored educational conference for health practitioners and academics on operational stress injuries in Montreal starting tomorrow, May 1, and ending May 3.

    The third initiative I would like to mention concerns Bill C-31, an act to amend the Pension Act and the RCMP Superannuation Act, which I introduced on April 10. Once passed, the bill will ensure the broadest coverage possible for Canadian Forces and RCMP members. It is meant to provide comprehensive 24/7 disability pension coverage for those who are deployed, either inside Canada or abroad, to designated operations of elevated risk, up to and including armed conflict. This newly created service type is called special duty operations. The amendments in the tabled legislation will also streamline the approval process for designating the special duty areas. I have no intention of taking this forum to seek your support for its passage, but since all have spoken in support of it in the House during second reading, I now seize this opportunity to thank you all, and I trust your committee will pass it with speed, after careful study, to the House for third reading and enactment. Bill C-31 is truly an important initiative, one that acknowledges the 21st century realities of military and RCMP life and addresses the needs not only for peace of mind, but also for timely and comprehensive coverage for benefits.

¹  (1545)  

    Our remembrance program is a tribute to Canada. Despite the years that have passed since our major wars, Canadians continue to hold veterans in high esteem, as evidenced last Remembrance Day, when record crowds attended services all across the country. Our Canada remembrance team has a very full slate over the coming year.

    This coming weekend we are celebrating the 60th anniversary of the Battle of the Atlantic. It will be my privilege to accompany a small delegation of veterans to Halifax, and the parliamentary secretary, who sits on your committee, Mr. Ivan Grose, will be escorting another delegation to Liverpool, England, to mark this significant anniversary.

    Also this year VAC will focus year-long remembrance efforts on marking the 50th anniversary of the Korean War armistice. Major ceremonies are planned at the National War Memorial in June and at the Korean Veterans National Wall of Remembrance in Brampton in July. VAC will conduct a pilgrimage for 33 veterans to Korea at the end of July. The Korean War armistice will be the major theme of Veterans Week in November. November will also mark the 85th anniversary of the armistice of the First World War. Sadly, Canadian veterans from the Great War will number only 12 or 13.

    Looking ahead to 2004 and the 60th anniversary of D-Day and the Battle of Normandy, I have established an advisory committee chaired by Major-General retired Richard Rohmer, a D-Day veteran. The committee will advise me in planning anniversary events.

    While I am on the subject of D-Day and Juno Beach, I announced in March $1.775 million in additional federal funding for the Juno Beach Centre, which opens this June, being the Government of Canada's contribution to a total of over $4 million. I know this particular project has been of extreme interest on the part of your committee. The centre will recognize Canada's contribution and achievements during the Second World War.

    Mr. Chairman and colleagues, that is a brief overview of what we're up to these days in the department. There are so many items that could be discussed that it is difficult to find a stopping point. I do want to take some time to thank you for your continued interest in advancing the cause of all our veterans and for the work you have continued to undertake on their behalf. In fact, much of what I have talked about today has come about because of your commitment to Canada's veterans and your willingness to provide ongoing advice to my department and the Government of Canada in this regard. Specifically, I want to recognize your significant contributions to the issues of service to Canadian Forces members and veterans and long-term care. In a good number of instances your recommendations have resulted in program improvements, and in others they have opened new areas for study. As I mentioned, your report on quality of life in the Canadian Forces was the impetus for many of our initiatives and has certainly brought Veterans Affairs Canada and the Department of National Defence together to identify and address the needs of common clients.

    Your advice and input relating to long-term care for our veterans continues to be recognized within my department. This value has never been more evident than in the past year. The Canada-wide study of the long-term care facilities under contract to VAC you are currently conducting has already paid off for us. Your early alert regarding long-term care on the west coast enabled us to take timely action to ensure that our veterans continue to receive stellar service. We welcome your final report, and we will continue to work with you in pursuit of our common mission, serving Canada's veterans.

    As I turn this meeting back to you, Mr. Chairman, for questions, please be assured of my department's continuing openness to your input and insights.

    Merci beaucoup.

¹  (1550)  

    The Chair: Thank you very much, Minister, for that very thorough presentation. Also, on behalf of the committee members, thank you for your kind comments about the work that has been done by this committee, specifically the subcommittee on veterans affairs. I should advise you as well that the committee at its last meeting agreed to give speedy consideration to Bill C-31, so we hope to have that before the committee as quickly as possible. I'm sure all members are looking forward to the clause-by-clause process on that particular bill.

    At this point I would like to recognize Mr. Bailey for questions, seven minutes.

    Mr. Roy Bailey (Souris—Moose Mountain, Canadian Alliance): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Minister.

    First I want to apologize to you for my absence. It is war-related, in that there was a group of self-appointed militia from my area who planned on marching to Ottawa to do something about what they consider very unfair taxes for our junior hockey league. I was just telling them we didn't think we needed any militia help whatsoever. That's a little dig about a problem I had.

    Mr. Minister, I want to suggest to you that larger municipalities or larger cities, with their police, with their firemen, may well look at the special designation areas and so on of this particular bill. I suspect that you may see a pattern following in the years ahead. With cities the size of Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, and so on, I'm going to forecast that this bill will be copied by them, and I think there's good reason for them to take a good look at it. I think we'll have a speedy passage of Bill C-31.

    I want to ask the minister if he provided any room in the funding for an extension of the VIP program beyond the year.

    Second, as you know, I've been caught up very much in the study of an event that took place just over two months ahead of November 11, 1918, the Battle of Cagnicourt, and the more I read of that, the more excited I get. I'm wondering, with the celebration that's coming in early September of this year, if this department has given any consideration to doing what I think Canadians should do, recognize this as one of the last battles of significance Canadians were in, and recognize that because of this battle, we probably saved the whole winter of 1918 from warfare.

¹  (1555)  

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: With respect to the Battle of Cagnicourt, the department has taken on the request of Mr. Gravel, who had been doing research on this particular area. I met with the researcher myself here on Parliament Hill, and I was very impressed with his work. I made an undertaking to him, and I was glad to hear that the member, Mr. Bailey, followed on this initiative as well. It is indeed a very important battle, and because of that, we have seen to it that there will be, at the minimum, a very senior official from our European operations in attendance to represent us during the ceremony in September. I have not foreclosed the possibility of my attending. As you know, there are many demands on the schedule of a minister, but I am glad that you have raised this issue, and we have given it due recognition, and we have the commitment of Mr. Puxley from European operations to attend this ceremony. So there will be a very senior official at the very least.

    The issue of extending the VIP remains very much alive in the department. I have been in a series of consultations, along with my officials, with the major veterans organizations on this very issue. It is an issue that is close to your heart and to my heart. I hope we'll see some movement on this in the near future. You can count on me to proceed with this issue.

    Mr. Roy Bailey: Thank you.

    The Chair: Before you get into your additional questions, I would ask you to circulate some of the research you've done in connection with that battle. Members might be interested in the history of the last hundred days of the war, which were critical in respect of some of the other battles Canadians were involved in. If you could provide us with some information, that would be very helpful.

    Mr. Roy Bailey: Thank you.

    Mr. Minister, I'd like to get into the area of home care. I know most provinces operate home care, and it's becoming a much more valuable and valued service within the provinces, because it allows everybody to stay within their home for a longer period of time. A veteran should qualify and should be totally cared for within the ambit of the provincial government in which he lives, if the inspection says they qualify. Where does Veterans Affairs come in? Do you cooperate with each province? Do you share the costs? Could we have even extension of shared costs with the provinces? Every province operates a little differently, but with a veteran living in a home who qualifies for home care, does Veterans Affairs pay for that without any provincial input, or is it a shared input?

º  (1600)  

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: For the details of that I will ask one of my officials, but let me say that we have worked very closely in cooperation with the provinces. We also take it very seriously that we have a direct responsibility to the veterans, and therefore we cannot abdicate that responsibility. We work very cooperatively in our home care facilities across the country. In fact, a few months ago we announced in partnership with the Province of P.E.I. a tele-home care project, showing precisely how the two levels of government, avoiding duplication, can truly enhance home care for the veterans.

    Brian.

    Mr. Brian Ferguson (Assistant Deputy Minister, Veterans Services, Department of Veterans Affairs): The entitlements veterans have for home care services are provided by the department when they apply through the department, but we do work very closely with the provinces. In fact, we've got a number of initiatives, such as the tele-home care the minister mentioned, and also in certain provinces we're expanding to see if we can do it even further afield with a project we call integrated services for seniors and veterans, where the community care workers in the province work closely with our area counsellors to see if we can't combine our efforts to bring a full suite of services to bear for common clients.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Because of our client-centred approach, we look at the veteran as the client and try to maximize our contact with them by partnering and working collaboratively with the provincial workers.

    The Chair: Thank you very much, Minister. Thank you, Mr. Bailey.

    Mr. Wood, seven minutes.

    Mr. Bob Wood (Nipissing, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Is the budget, $2.5 billion, more than, less than, about the same as you've had in previous years?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: That is inclusive of about $224 million, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, for the reasons I indicated, increased applications for war veterans allowance and other needs of the department. But the budget is sufficient for our needs.

    Mr. Bob Wood: Okay.

    Let me just say we appreciate what you did here in providing some additional funding for George Derby and Broadmead. Was that a one-time funding thing?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: With Broadmead?

    Mr. Bob Wood: And George Derby. It's not an ongoing thing, is it?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Discussions are ongoing for further agreements. Who would like to help me with that?

    Mr. Brian Ferguson: The funding we've provided is part of an agreement for service that is continuing. The amount of up-tick they receive for certain funding continues. The funding was introduced this year for Broadmead. This is partial funding, and we will add more funding to that when we finalize the agreement.

    Mr. Bob Wood: And the same with George Derby?

    Mr. Brian Ferguson: The same with George Derby.

    Mr. Bob Wood: The only thing that concerns me is your infrastructure program. You've invested close to $70 million. You talked about projects in Moncton, Fredericton, Saint John, Quebec City, Toronto, Winnipeg, Calgary, and Victoria. Some of those we've seen in our travels, but one place--and I know I brought this up about a month ago--is St. John's, Newfoundland. The situation there, to my mind anyway, is in deep trouble. There are three residents per room, which, in my view, is totally unacceptable. These people don't have a lot to look forward to. They need a bigger space. There's a lack of physiotherapy. They don't have a craft centre. Their food concerns are noted. They have a need there. When we were there, we were under the impression that they were about to send in a proposal for funding, which I think was supposed to be the middle of April. Has that been done? If it has, what is your turnaround time before you can actually start doing some infrastructure work at St. John's? Mr. Minister, if you ever get a chance to go there, you're going to be just appalled. I'll tell you that right now. It's not a nice place to go if you're a veteran.

º  (1605)  

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Well, Mr. Chairman---

    Mr. Bob Wood: As a committee, we want to see this thing straightened out as quickly as possible. I know Mr. Ferguson is well aware of it, and so is Ms. Bruce. I just want to know the update, I want to know when things are going to get rolling, because they need that service updated as quickly as possible.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: I'm very pleased that you have brought this to our attention, and I should indicate to you that most recently the disability study report has been received by the department and is being given prompt study. Hopefully, we will be able to make the decision as to how to proceed with due speed as well. At the first opportunity, we will advise the committee when the decision has been made. The request is in the neighourhood of $2.6 million?

    Mr. Brian Ferguson: About $2.4 million.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: So action has been taken. We have discussed this at the department. Given the description of the situation, I did not have to visit, but I would like to visit, if only to have the opportunity to meet with the people up there and tell them we really understand their plight and we are here to address that particular situation.

    Mr. Bob Wood: Is the money well within your budget?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: We will find the means.

    Mr. Bob Wood: Thank you. What a guy.

    On Bill C-31, I should know this, but I don't. Is that going to be retroactive? Is it going to include RCMP people and special forces people who are now on the ground in various spots where we are aiding various other countries? There's Afghanistan, there's going to be Iraq.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: There are two components to this bill. One is the special duty area, and the main improvement in this amendment is to have the capability to designate an area with speed. Now it can take as much as 10 or 11 months to designate that. I should say, however, that by a special directive, no one has been denied benefits. Nonetheless, we would like to give a peace of mind to the members and to the families that when they leave, they're automatically covered already, because the designation has happened. This particular bill would allow the process of designation of a special duty area to be immediate.

    With respect to the special duty operation, which is a new type of service as part of this bill, retroactivity of the benefit of a given law is not the rule, because it creates complications and problems that can be seen. When me amend a law, however, where others have been receiving benefits, there is a flexibility to allow grandfathering, so that those who have been operating under the present law, when it's modified, should not lose the benefits only because of the amendments. I think in this instance that will not be the situation.

    Mr. Jack Stagg (Deputy Minister, Department of Veterans Affairs): My understanding is that the few servicemen we have in the Iran-Iraq area now will be covered, because it was declared a special duty area, I think, in 1991-1992. So there will not be a problem with the people coming out as veterans from there.

    Mr. Bob Wood: Great. Thank you.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Mrs. Wayne, for seven minutes.

º  (1610)  

    Mrs. Elsie Wayne (Saint John, PC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    Mr. Minister, as you know, one of the issues I have been dealing with relates to the compensation of veterans who were involved in chemical weapons testing during the Second World War. Many of those young men--and I get many, many letters from them--who were used in these tests have developed and suffered very serious physical problems, problems that are consistent with illnesses caused by the chemical weapons used. The government already has recognized this testing, because it has put up a plaque in their honour at CFB Suffield, but what they really need is some form of compensation and help, because of the illnesses they have from this mustard gas and the testing that took place. Could you tell me if your department is looking at some form of compensation for these men?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: There are two components to compensation. Are they getting benefits as a result of a compensation lump sum, or are they getting benefits without the lump-sum compensation? Of course, when any veteran has difficulties as a result of service, particularly after exposure, they are entitled to all the benefits that are there under the Veterans Act. If it is a matter of special compensation, it would be in the purview of the Department of National Defence. Not that I'm passing the buck, but that is the reality.

    It's a very important question. I just recently met with the Minister of National Defence, and we discussed this very issue and what else we could do. We have decided to have an outreach program, to get to all who were exposed to this particular experiment. The list, of course, was for some time not available. We are now in the midst of checking all of them to see who was exposed and whether they are aware of the benefits that could be given to them, the usual benefits to which they are entitled under the Veterans Act. So we are in communication with them. This is an ongoing study that we started recently.

    I should also say, if you should happen to know, members of this committee, of anybody who might have been exposed to this particular situation, please advise the department, so that we can immediately trace that particular file and respond with speed.

    Mrs. Elsie Wayne: Okay. Thank you.

    We've all been very much in favour of long-term care at home for our veterans, before they have to go into a long-term health care facility. But the benefits given to the spouses of the veterans after they pass away only last for one year. I'm wondering if your department--and probably you have been asked about this before--could extend those benefits to those spouses, because most of them are in the eighties as well, they're not young any more. They have no way of looking after themselves, they truly don't. They are there with their husbands, God love them, until they pass away. Somebody has to help them as well. Have you taken a look at that, Mr. Minister?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: I would like to thank the member for repeatedly raising this issue, because it is a very human issue that touches the heart of everyone. In fact, the department is actively engaged, as I said in response to Mr. Bailey, the file is very much open. I remain very optimistic that we will be able to find an imaginative solution.

    Mrs. Elsie Wayne: That's good.

    One of the most important issues I have is the ongoing legal battle with respect to government's management of the veterans' pension funds. I know constitutional conventions prevent you from discussing a legal matter that is currently before the courts, so I'll not ask you about the a specific case. I will ask you to tell us about the types of contingency plans that are prepared in your department for situations in general when you have a sudden demand for increased resources like that. Can you tell me what you do do in this case?

º  (1615)  

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: In situations where a veteran is incapable of caring for himself, the department takes over, and then the veteran passes away, what do we do? In 1991 we started to pay, that now is law. I don't think there is a need any more for a contingency plan, because the present law is very clear.

    Mrs. Elsie Wayne: Thank you very much.

[Translation]

    The Chair: Mr. Bertrand.

    Mr. Robert Bertrand (Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Minister, you mentioned Hôpital Sainte-Anne in your presentation. I know that there has been considerable discussion about transferring this hospital from Veterans Affairs to Quebec's Department of Health and Social Services. How far have talks progressed on this matter? That's my first question.

    Secondly, you noted in your presentation that the department could count on approximately 10,000 long-term care beds. Can you tell me how many veterans are on a waiting list?

[English]

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: I will ask one of the officials if we have the most up to date statistics on the waiting list, but let me indicate that there is no discussion, if you are referring to it, as to transferring Ste. Anne's to Quebec. There was a discussion of that many years ago. It is now a centre, as we have announced, for the PTSD disorder, and my sense is that for the lifetime of this minister it will remain a veteran's facility. I do not foreclose the future for the youth of today. We can be very proud that it is being renovated very extensively, and that modernization will make us all proud of our service to veterans.

    The issue of priority access beds and waiting lists was a very serious one a while back, and the department was seized of this and held a pilot project wherein, were beds not available, we would provide service at home and ensure that the quality of care would be the same. Following the pilot project, a survey was done of the veterans who availed themselves of this service. The survey, to our pleasant surprise, showed that when asked, if a bed became available, whether they would now go back to the priority access bed, they said they would like to stay at home.

    I would like statistics and further comments from the officials.

    Mr. Brian Ferguson: Actually, I don't have at my disposal meaningful statistics on the waiting list. We can attempt to come back to the committee with some statistics, but they can be very misleading. There are people on the waiting lists at another facility who are hoping at some point to get into a priority access bed facility, but have no real intent at the moment to go into the facility. That is one of the reasons we, for example, in British Columbia, are cleaning up those waiting lists, and we are doing it in a very proactive way with the province there to get the actual numbers. When you get the actual numbers, the waiting lists are quite small. We're in that process now across the country with our priority access bed facilities, so I would prefer, if the committee will bear with us, to come back with numbers along those lines, which we probably could do, I would suggest, within 30 days or so.

º  (1620)  

    Mr. Robert Bertrand: Mr. Minister, what you said a while ago amazed me. Has there been a cost analysis done on how much it costs the department to keep a veteran at home as compared to in a long-term care hospital?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Studies have been done of this question, and all the evidence shows that the cost of caring for a veteran, in fact, any senior, will be far far less when it is done at home than in any formalized hospital. The evidence is very strong that it is far better. But even more important than cost, important as it is, is that the quality of life is much enhanced. I'm not surprised at the results of the study about seniors. In my other life, where I did a study precisely on delivering intravenous therapy to patients at home and in the hospital, the same results were there.

[Translation]

    Mr. Robert Bertrand: Thank you very much.

[English]

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Bertrand.

    Mr. Benoit, five minutes.

    Mr. Leon Benoit (Lakeland, Canadian Alliance): Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good afternoon, Mr. Minister, ladies and gentlemen.

    There have been some announcements made by the defence minister, and I think by yourself, of increased benefits to Canadian Forces members. We don't have specifics on that yet, but some of these benefits, of course, will be paid by the Department of National Defence, some by Veterans Affairs, depending on circumstances. Could you tell me what the costs of those added benefits will be? Is anything put in the estimates for this year to cover that cost? What are the estimated costs over the next five or ten years?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Of course, with respect to the estimates of the Department of National Defence, I am precluded from commenting, and I would respectfully submit that you ask the Minister for National Defence, who is a very eminent person and a good friend, to answer that question directly. But you are right, that benefits have been increased to remove the inequality that exists. The minister gave this answer in the House during question period. As to the other benefits that will accrue when you add the two, there are CF members who are still on the veterans benefits provision, and the entitlement of CF members to the plan under DND is completely separate from the entitlement of a veteran under the Veterans Act. I do not know the exact figure when you add one to the other during the period of transition.

    Mr. Leon Benoit: So you're acknowledging that there will be an added cost, but you don't know what that will be.

    One of the things that's been pointed out, a concern expressed by some Canadian Forces members, is that the top brass, I believe full colonel and above, get a lump sum pay-out if they're killed on the job, or in fact, any time, I believe, as long as they're an active Canadian Forces member. Lower ranks complain that they don't have that provided. In fact, they don't even have access to that type of lump sum coverage. Usually, by my understanding--I'm not very familiar with the department of Veterans Affairs, I'm more familiar with the Department of National Defence--some of those costs would come out of the Department of National Defence budget, but if someone were injured on the job, started to collect benefits through Veterans Affairs, and then died, would that lump sum still be paid? Further, would it be paid by the Department of Veterans Affairs or by National Defence? Third, are you anticipating that the lump sum death benefit will be made available for all ranks, so that there's something closer to equality in the way the different ranks are treated?

º  (1625)  

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: It's a very important issue. The Minister of National Defence, as he indicated in the House, has addressed the matter of unfairness. What you have raised now is whether we are able to harmonize the benefits from the two departments when we have the same person. We are in the midst of this, we are in close consultation with the Minister of National Defence, and when we have the clarification and harmonization, I will be pleased to make that information known to the committee.

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Benoit.

    Mr. Wood.

    Mr. Bob Wood: To pick up on what my colleague Mr. Bertrand said, on the VIP program, Mr. Minister--or whoever can answer this--have you ever calculated how much money it saves the department a year or over a period of years?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: How much do we save?

    Mr. Bob Wood: By keeping a veteran in their home, rather than their going to a hospital.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: I will ask Mr. Ferguson to respond to that.

    Mr. Brian Ferguson: We've had various studies done and various estimates made of the costs and savings, and as the minister mentioned earlier, they are very significant. I wouldn't want to give a precise number, but they range from one-quarter to one-eighth of the cost of institutionalization. So we think the veterans independence program has very much proven its worth in that whole area. I wouldn't want to be pinned down on specific numbers, because you can get experts who will disagree on elements of the costing, but I don't think there would be any disagreement that it's somewhere in that range.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: It's a vital question of fiscal responsibility that the member has raised. The Minister of Finance announced during last year's budget a challenge to all departments to participate in this process of fiscal responsibility, and the Department of Veterans Affairs is participating in this common government endeavour.

    Mr. Bob Wood: We've all talked about extending the VIP services, and I think some of the estimates are around $65 million over five years. I'm just seeing if we could extend that program without its being a big drain on the coffers of Veterans Affairs. That's basically what I'm getting at.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: We're very conscious of that. The figure you have alluded to is correct. Our best estimate is some $65 million if you extend it for a lifetime. But this is the challenge before us, and that's why we wanted to be imaginative in our approach, so that the quality of care will not suffer as we add on enhanced programs for veterans and their spouses. I'm glad that you raised that question, and the veterans organizations are equally conscious of the need for fiscal prudence.

    Mr. Bob Wood: As we get into the business of extending services to veterans or people serving in the armed forces now, on the Veterans Review and Appeal Board do you, Mr. Marchand, have access to an expert on PTSD? Is there somebody, when you run up against a case like this, you need to call on to clarify if it is PTSD or not? Is there somebody you can rely on to get that information to make a decision?

º  (1630)  

    Mr. Victor Marchand (Acting Chair, Veterans Review & Appeal Board): In fact, cases that deal with the condition usually have an expert report in support of the claim. The board members regularly receive training from experts in this area. They are often exposed to people who come to discuss the subject of PTSD or any other service-related condition. So it's part of the evidence we have on file and it's part of our recurring training.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: It is critical that we clarify it, and I would like to add to what Mr. Marchand has said. In the determination that a disability exists as a consequence of illness or injury, it is not necessary to have the exact diagnosis. What is critical is that the disability exists and is related to the military service and the other criteria, and that, of course, will be attended to. I'm glad that you raised the question.

    Mr. Bob Wood: From our travels across the country in the last year, there's something I don't think any of us on the committee ever thought of. Veterans Affairs has got to start considering accommodation of spouses of veterans. What we're doing in putting veterans into long-term homes or hospitals is splitting up couples. I don't think we're in the business of creating that kind of tension. Do you follow me?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Yes, indeed. I had the opportunity to visit a couple of recently built or about to be finished centres, and I have been impressed that they have taken this issue very seriously. To the extent that they could accommodate them, even during a visit or a certain segment of time, the spouses would be allowed to be together in specially designated rooms, as in London, Ontario. Also, they have built a new place now in Calgary, where I was the day before the snow storm. They would like to ensure that the new place is also near rental accommodations for spouses. The issue--and I think you would like to raise that--is when the cost of the rental for the spouses is much more than if they were staying, say, in the older facility area. We have no answer at this point for you. Certainly, we would not like the spouses to separate, particularly during their last few years in life.

    The Chair: Thank you, Minister.

    Thank you, Mr. Wood.

    Mrs. Wayne.

    Mrs. Elsie Wayne: I have a case on my desk of a man who was a chaplain in the armed forces. The armed forces decided that he was going to be the chaplain out west, and he was there for 17 years. Now that gentleman is back in Fredericton, because he's become ill. He's old, and his wife has been in touch with me because she can't look after him any more. She was trying to get him into the veterans hospital in Fredericton. He was put on the list--I worked on that. Now someone has called from Halifax and said he can't go on the list, because he was out west, he wasn't overseas. He didn't choose to be out west for 17 years counselling and looking after our men and women in uniform, the military of the day decided that's where the gentleman would be. This is a very fine gentleman. He really needs to have care now, because both he and his wife are very elderly. She has been in constant contact with me. What should I do now? How can we take care of him? What are we going to do for him? He gave his life to look after the men and women in uniform.

º  (1635)  

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: And he went to B.C. as a chaplain?

    Mrs. Elsie Wayne: Yes, as a chaplain.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: This is an individual case that I would like my officials to brief me on and to review.

    Mrs. Elsie Wayne: I'll send all the information to you right away.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Yes, so that I can have the details and we can review it.

    Mrs. Elsie Wayne: Okay, I'll do that.

    I know your office is very much aware of the large number of letters I have been receiving, as I'm sure you have, from the merchant navy veterans about the possibility of creating a merchant navy day. Some have even joined forces with the veterans of the Royal Canadian Navy to ask for a maritime day. While I think we can agree that their service is deserving of such an honour, I'm uncertain what the official position of Veteran's Affairs Canada is on this important issue. Could you please let me know? We're recognizing Vimy, and we should. I've been over there to see the Vimy monument. God love them, it was really something to see. I've had different groups asking for a merchant navy day or a maritime day. To me, it should be a merchant navy day, and I'm wondering how you and your department feel.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: We have November 11 as the day to remember all veterans. When we have a request for any other day, we take into account what it may do to the great national day we have for all veterans, because there are many battles, there are many groups, there are many sectors. This is not to detract from the importance of each. My officials understand, I am seized of this issue, and we're discussing that. When we have an appropriate answer, we will let you know.

    Mrs. Elsie Wayne: In the first round, Mr. Minister, I asked you about the contingency plan for when your department needs to distribute a significant amount above what you have budgeted. When we got the compensation package for the merchant navy men, there were more of them than we realized at the time. Without asking for your comments on a particular case, can you assure us that if unexpected costs arise, the core services of Veterans Affairs will not be affected? We wouldn't want the core services to be affected negatively.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: I would ask my deputy minister to respond to the question.

    Mr. Jack Stagg: I won't relate this in any way to the court case we're dealing with, but the government does have a way in which it deals with contingent liabilities. It assesses on an annual basis what those contingent liabilities are, based on a whole variety of court situations, potential legal liabilities, and puts aside some funds for the eventuality that it must legally pay out funds. If there is a legal responsibility for the government to cover certain expenditures, there will be moneys available to do that.

    Mrs. Elsie Wayne: Thank you very much.

    The Chair: Thank you, Mrs. Wayne.

    Mr. Grose.

    Mr. Ivan Grose (Oshawa, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I may manage to bury a question in here somewhere, but there's a point I want to make. I wasn't fortunate enough to make the western tour, so all I've been on is the eastern tour, and we visited five hospitals. I guess I saw the best and the worst. As Mr. Wood stated, St. John's, I guess, is the worst, but let's make one point clear. It was not the staff or the care or the compassion that was being shown, it was strictly the plant, which isn't adequate. We went from there to Saint John, New Brunswick, and that was the best. That doesn't surprise me, as there's a very persuasive and efficient member for that city, but that is an outstanding facility. I know we can't bring everything up to that standard, but it certainly should be the benchmark we should try to live up to. It fulfils my idea of the best you can do in the circumstances.

    One thing was said to me that I know I will never forget. Very many of these veterans are elderly, they suffer from dementia. As a matter of fact, the proportion was surprising to me. One of the workers said to me, we don't ask them to live in our world, we live in theirs. I think that's one of the most compassionate things I've ever heard, and that's exactly the standard I saw applied in all the facilities. There's not a question there, but I did want to make plain that the staffing and the care and compassion are exactly what they should be. It's above and beyond. In some cases the facilities leave a little to be desired, and I hope we can get that St. John's situation cleared up.

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

º  (1640)  

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Grose.

    Mr. Benoit, five minutes.

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

    I asked before about the lump sum death benefit that is currently paid to the top brass in the Canadian Forces and not the lower ranks. I think you said the Minister of Defence announced at some time that this death benefit would be put in place. Is that correct?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: No. What I said was that he would equalize the payment for the general and the non-general in the forces, there will be no inequality as a consequence of that. That is my understanding of his answer in the House.

    Mr. Leon Benoit: Currently, the generals get, I think, a $250,000 death benefit. I don't know the exact amount. Whether they're killed on duty or not doesn't matter, they still receive the benefit. The premiums, I understand, are paid by taxpayers, not by the generals themselves. So does that mean this same benefit will be applied to all ranks?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: If I begin to answer questions in the areas of other ministers, not within my portfolio, it will not be wise and prudent, because I just do not know the details. So with all respect, Mr. Benoit, questions on the Department of National Defence should be asked of the Minister for National Defence to get the most detailed and accurate answer.

    Mr. Leon Benoit: You indicated, Mr. Minister, that you were in close consultation on the issue, so I thought you would know the details.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: That particular one we did not discuss. We discussed the separate issue Madam Wayne raised earlier in the particular meeting I had with the Minister of National Defence.

    Mr. Leon Benoit: Okay.

    On another subject, recognizing the Battle of the Atlantic, it seems the government went kicking and screaming towards sponsoring some kind of recognition. There was a push on by some private individuals and people from opposition parties, and the government now is going to do something to recognize the battle and to help pay for some veterans to go for that important recognition. I'm just wondering why the Battle of the Atlantic isn't recognized as much and as readily as some of the other important battles that took place during the two world wars.

º  (1645)  

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: To my knowledge, the importance of old battles that played a role in the defence of freedom and democracy for Canada has been duly recognized, and I am not aware that any particular battle has been put down. Certainly, a significant anniversary, according to our military historians' assessment, is celebrated, like that of Vimy, which catapulted Canada to being a nation, because of a particular triumph. So I think, when we celebrate a particular battle, it does not follow that we denigrate another battle.

    Mr. Leon Benoit: The Battle of the Atlantic, of course, is the longest battle we recognize. There were an incredible number of sorties carried out, something like 25,000 trips--it's almost unimaginable, and a great service was provided. The awareness, I guess, isn't there on the part of the general public about the contribution made by our naval personnel during the wars in those operations, and again, it does seem the government was less willing to recognize that. I have a little trouble understanding why that would be, but I think you've answered that not recognizing one particular battle doesn't mean you're placing any less importance on it.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: As I said to in my presentation, I will be heading to Halifax precisely to participate in celebrating the significance of the Battle of the Atlantic. I will be bringing with me a pilgrimage of some of the veterans involved. So yes, we have given it the recognition it merits.

    The Chair: Mr. Bertrand.

    Mr. Robert Bertrand: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

    I have three quick questions, and if I have any time left, I understand Mr. Wood has a few more questions.

    Regarding the veterans independence program, you say the number one priority of veterans organizations is to extend VIP to survivors beyond the current one-year extension. I'd like to find out who is considered a survivor. I know the spouse is considered a survivor, but is there anybody else who could be considered a survivor?

    Second, you say as of April 11 there were only 74 prisoners of war who had received their payments. That's about $1.5 million dollars. How much money had you budgeted for this program?

    The last one concerns Remembrance Day. I notice that every year you send a wreath to all the legions. I was wondering if that program will be continued this year.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Unless I am corrected by my officials, that latter program will continue.

    On the prisoners of war, this is an ex gratia payment that is coming from our budget. On the exact amount, I will defer to one of the officials.

    Mr. Jack Stagg: We budgeted somewhere between $1.5 million and $2 million to cover this, so we're not far off what we anticipated.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: On the VIP, the submissions on the part of the veterans organizations are only with regard to spouses, I suppose because they not able to care for them because of age. The children likely are not in this condition, so that has not been raised as an issue.

    The Chair: Mr. Wood.

    Mr. Bob Wood: You mentioned in your presentation, Mr. Minister, the falls prevention program. Authorities at the Camp Hill facility in Halifax are now promoting the use of a type of hockey girdle to be worn by residents. It's too bad Mrs. Wayne is not here, because she was one of the people demonstrating the unit. The number of serious injuries related to falls has dropped significantly. Is this girdle thing they've devised available to all the other veterans affairs hospitals? If not, I'd like to make a recommendation that it should be.

º  (1650)  

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Do we know the answer, Verna?

    Ms. Verna Bruce (Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Veterans Affairs): Brian would have the information, but my understanding is that it was the first time we had seen that particular type of apparatus, and we did make a commitment that we would talk to Camp Hill about getting more information on how it works there.

    Mr. Brian Ferguson: I have no further information, but we could act on your proposal by looking at it very actively, Mr. Wood.

    Mr. Bob Wood: I'm glad that Mrs. Wayne is back. Elsie, we're talking about the type of hockey girdle that you were modelling at Camp Hill. We took it with us when we went, and I just said it should be available to all the veterans affairs hospitals, because it's done a great job of reducing falls, and as you know, that's where a lot of injuries occur once people are admitted to the hospital. I don't know what the cost is to do that, but I would like some commitment from you or Mr. Ferguson or Ms. Bruce that you will look into the cost and see if it would be feasible to make sure all hospitals have access to that particular apparatus.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Certainly, we will look into the effectiveness of the device, as well as the cost for that, and explore if there are other devices in the market that purport to do the same thing. I was reading in a technology journal that in Tokyo they're looking at putting something below your foot, and depending on the signal, you can be alerted that you're going to a different altitude. We will explore all these new devices that could help reduce accidents and falls.

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Wood.

    Mr. Grose.

    Mr. Ivan Grose: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Again, there's no question, but I'd like to make a point. I don't want to leave the impression, as one member did, that the department was dragged kicking and screaming into Battle of Atlantic Day. In my city of Oshawa we have a Battle of Atlantic dinner every year, a parade, the laying of the wreath, and Last Post, everything that is done for Armistice Day. I know many other cities have the same thing. The fact that this is the 60th anniversary makes it most emphatic, and I think we're making a significant effort on it, but it's not the first time. I'm going to miss the one in my city this year.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: You'll be in Liverpool, England.

    Mr. Ivan Grose: I'm not going to cancel out. They'll probably understand why I'm not there. The point is, we weren't dragged kicking and screaming.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    The Chair: Thank you for those comments, Mr. Grose.

    I don't see any other questioners, but I have a few questions of my own, Mr. Minister.

    People in my area, the Ottawa area, are very excited about the construction of the war museum and the fact that it seems to be moving along very nicely. I know a lot of veterans are looking forward to its opening. I'm wondering if any thought has been given whatsoever to the idea of opening a small field or outreach office of Veterans Affairs within the new war museum. I expect there will be a tremendous number of veterans from across the country visiting that at some point over the coming years. Is there anything at all that might be contemplated?

º  (1655)  

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Not to my knowledge, Mr. Chairman, but I would ask the deputy.

    Mr. Jack Stagg: In another life I had known that the museum is to be veterans-friendly. What the specifics are of that I'm not sure, but there's a real sense of awareness in the building, the construction, and the operation that it must be veterans-friendly.

    Mr. Brian Ferguson: May I add to that? If you mean, Mr. Chair, we might be able to inform them about services and benefits in that environment, I think it would be a really significant opportunity for us, one we could look at.

    The Chair: Just so that they're aware that Veterans Affairs is out there, that they're accessible, and that they're interested in the welfare of our veterans.

    I'd like to ask a question as well about the liaison that exists between your department and the Department of Canadian Heritage in connection with the issue of remembrance. How would you characterize that relationship over the last number of years, the extent to which Heritage actively works with you in promoting the act of remembrance?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Veterans Affairs Canada is the lead department for remembrance, but if, for example, you use the museum as a tool to remember, that is under Heritage. When I was in France last April, Canadian Heritage particpated as well. I think the relationship is excellent, but we don't have that liaison and discussion on a day-to-day or week-to-week basis.

    Do you have anything in particular you feel would be achieved by making our contact much closer? What exactly are you envisioning?

    The Chair: I think back to a few years ago, when the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Ms. Copps, declared Juno Beach a national heritage site and there was a plaque unveiling there. It was quite well attended, a wonderful ceremony. Also, the site where Lieutenant-Colonel John McCrae operated during the First World War, when he was caring for our soldiers on the front lines in the area around Flanders, was also declared a national heritage site. I'm just wondering if we can expect more of that in the future, or was that a one-shot deal, so we're not likely to see it again?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: With the one in France, we were alerted as to the coming of Canadian Heritage. I participated in the event. A friendly reminder from a fellow minister does not hurt, to ensure that there is a coordinated approach to some of this, because it is far better if we can pool our resources to advance the cause of remembrance. I will see to it that I give friendly whispers to the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

    The Chair: On the subject of remembrance as well, many of us, thinking back to 1994, were very impressed with what happened with the 50th anniversary of Juno Beach. It seemed, in some respects, because it was the 50th I suppose, to go above and beyond what had been done in past commemorations. I'm wondering if anything special is being considered for next year, because it's a very important milestone, a very important opportunity to educate Canadians about one of the most critical events of the Second World War, the Canadian and allied landings on the Normandy beaches.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: At the opening of the centre this June, which is only the 59th year, we hope to have a very good government presence, but on the actual 60th anniversary, I would ask Madam Bruce to give further details.

»  (1700)  

    Ms. Verna Bruce: You're absolutely right, this is a very important and very historic celebration we'll be doing next year. There's a lot of interest from the veteran community. As a result, the minister has established an advisory committee chaired by Richard Rohmer, a retired general, with a large representation of other stakeholders, and they're very actively planning for 2004, trying to make sure they've got all the bases covered, that there is enough space on the beach for Canadian veterans. So I think you'll see a really good celebration next year.

    The Chair: Is there anything particular we might look forward to? Has anything been defined to the point where we can look forward to particular events?

    Ms. Verna Bruce: One thing they're working very hard on is the actual celebration on the beach on June 6. There will, of course, be a lot of other events surrounding that, but we have to wait for the advisory committee to come back to us with their plans.

    The Chair: Are there any common remembrances planned with the British and the Americans on June 6?

    Ms. Verna Bruce: They are working with the British, for sure. There's been quite a bit of contact with the high commission trying to find ways for the two to work together. I'm not sure about the Americans, but we can check.

    The Chair: Okay, that's very helpful.

    The other question I had was in connection---

    Mrs. Elsie Wayne: Excuse me. I'm on house duty, so I have to go. I don't like to leave, because I really appreciate the minister and his staff and the work they do for veterans, but I'm on house duty. I don't know who's filling in for me, maybe no one is.

    The Chair: Thank you, Mrs. Wayne.

    Minister, in the course of your presentation you said:

We are placing specially designated Veterans Affairs client service teams at 17 key Canadian Forces locations across the country. Members of these teams will deliver departmental services, act as a liaison between my department and DND, and will themselves become centres of expertise on CF client issues.

Obviously, one of the most important issues is PTSD. Are there any other client service issues you expect to focus on in connection with these centres?

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: There's the general issue of transition to civilian life, should it happen. I would ask Brian to give us some more details.

    Mr. Brian Ferguson: This is an excellent example of the close collaboration that's been going on in the past few years with the Department of National Defence. They have on these bases case managers who help individuals who have difficulties within National Defence. We've placed on the bases transition services people to help, as the minister says, individuals, when they leave the Canadian Forces, to make a transition to civilian life. One of the really interesting things we're doing, and we're experimenting with it now on four bases, is an exit interview, a transition interview. Every individual who leaves the Canadian Forces will eventually receive an interview with one of our staff. We look at a whole range of issues, including their health status, their employment status, their need to be connected to community services in the community to which they're moving, the whole range of issues of daily living.

    The Chair: Okay.

    You mentioned in your comments, Minister, that you met with Secretary of Veterans Anthony J. Principi, your American counterpart, and I'm just wondering about the extent to which there is liaison between the two departments, the one in the States and the Department of Veterans Affairs here in Canada. Are there things they're doing that we can perhaps emulate? Are there things we are doing that they would perhaps benefit from? Obviously, some of the same issues occur on both sides of the border with the age and experience of these particular veterans. Could you also offer a comment with respect to a comparison with the Canadian programs that are offered? In a general way, can you offer any comparisons between the level of service veterans receive on this side of the border compared with south of the 49th parallel?

»  (1705)  

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: We did not go into the level of service, so I cannot comment on that. Of course, the committee can rest assured that they are providing excellent public service. We still would like to know if there are any more improvements we could undertake that we might have overlooked, and vice versa. Because of that, we have agreed to exchange staff, precisely so we can address the very question you have raised and profit from best practices.

    Certainly, they have done a lot on PTSD, because of the magnitude of the veterans population they have, and they have undertaken a lot of study. During this recent war in Iraq, I understand, they have put in place questionnaires in advance for a prospective view of circumstances following this particular war experience. Therefore, they will be able to answer some of the questions that could not be answered because it was done retrospectively before, about a decade ago.

    I should also say we have an international operations section in our department, and we have a close linkage on benefits with the American counterpart.

    My understanding is that the level of services is, by and large, exemplary in both countries, and so we do not have to worry at all about the quality of care. Still, how can we better understand a particular issue, in this instance post-traumatic stress disorder? How can we increase and enhance the professional capabilities of the staff? We have agreed to pursue precisely that dialogue even more intensely.

    The Chair: Okay.

    Minister, on behalf of the committee, I'd like to thank you and your officials for being here today. I think it's been a very useful and productive meeting, and we certainly have appreciated your responses. The depth of your knowledge on some of these issues is really quite impressive, I must say. I think members around this committee share with me the view that you have one of the most important jobs in government, looking after our veterans. On behalf of the committee, thank you for being here.

    Hon. Rey Pagtakhan: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your leadership as chair of the committee.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    The meeting is adjourned.