Mr. Chair and members of the committee—

thank you for allowing me to testify before you today. Veterans are grateful for the attention you have given to their needs and your work in addressing a number of shortfalls in the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act, commonly called the new Veterans Charter, and its attendant regulations.

The 14 recommendations of your report last summer have provided a significant first step in redressing gaps in current legislation meant to assure the well-being of veterans by dealing with the top issues facing our most severely disabled veterans. While the new benefits for veterans, contained in Bill C-59, constitute another step in the right direction, it is but a small step and does not fully address the long-standing top priorities of veterans and their associations.

To recap, for the past several years traditional veterans' groups have been unanimous and consistent with regard to their top three priorities: the earnings loss benefit must be improved to provide 100% of pre-release income, continue for life, and include increases for projected career earnings for a Canadian Forces member; the maximum disability award must be increased consistent with what is provided to injured civilian workers who receive general damages in law court; and the current inequality with regard to earnings loss benefits for class A and class B reservists, those with fewer than 180 days, for injuries attributable to service, must cease.

Further key shortfalls to be addressed were outlined in the assembly's latest letter to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, dated July 18, 2014.

The provisions of the new Veterans Charter unreasonably constrain the number of disabled veterans who are able to qualify for appropriate levels of entitlement to this important allowance.

The exceptional incapacity allowance concept, founded under the Pension Act, should be incorporated in the new Veterans Charter. This allowance has traditionally addressed the impact of the disabilities suffered by 100% veteran pensioners, with reference to their difficulty to cope given their overall capacity. Introducing the exceptional incapacity allowance into the new Veterans Charter would augment the limitations of the permanent impairment allowance, particularly in circumstance where a seriously disabled veteran confronts the ravages of age.

In order to recognize the caregiving requirements that many disabled veterans confront to cope with their incapacities, the attendant's allowance provisions of the Pension Act should be added to the new Veterans Charter, in recognition of the financial costs faced by many families in this context. The new Veterans Charter should acknowledge that veterans with dependants should receive a higher level of compensation, either through the augmentation of the lump-sum disability award or through an increase in the earnings loss benefit for such veterans and their families.

Bill C-59, as it currently stands, does not fully address any of these recommendations. Specifically, the retirement income security benefit provides for a maximum of 70% of pre-age-65 earnings loss benefit, which itself is a maximum of 75% of pre-tax, pre-release salary, or, when you do the math, 52.25% of the pre-tax, pre-release salary, without any provision for projected Canadian Armed Forces career earnings increases. A survivor would receive 50% of the retirement income security benefit. This falls far short of the recommended 100% of pre-release salary, with projected career earnings increases.

Let's put some numbers on this. A regular force corporal currently earns $56,568 per annum before taxes. The earnings loss benefit would reduce that figure to $42,426. After age 65, the pre-tax amount of the retirement income security benefit would be $29,700. His survivor would receive $14,850 annually. Both of these amounts are well below the poverty line.

Note that these are maximum amounts, and under Bill C-59 they would be reduced by unspecified other amounts. What quality of life could the veteran or the survivor expect to experience under these circumstances? This alarming situation will be further exacerbated by other government cost-shedding actions, such as the current readjustment of cost sharing for the public service health care plan, which many veterans depend on for supplemental health insurance. It will be changed from the current 25% participant and 75% government share to a 50-50 scheme. Where will veterans and their survivors find the means to keep pace with this and other cost increases under the retirement income security benefit?

The solution to the quality of life that disabled veterans deserve lies not in what Bill C-59 proposes, but rather in adoption of the long-standing recommendations of veterans. It is our hope that this new benefit is but the first step towards meeting our stated needs. The Canadian Association of Veterans in United Nations Peacekeeping therefore supports inclusion of the retirement income security benefit in Bill C-59, but calls on government to commit to meeting the full requirement in its next session.

The family caregiver relief benefit is a welcomed addition to the suite of benefits available under the new Veterans Charter. However, at $7,238, it falls far short of a similar benefit under the Canadian Armed Forces compensation and benefit instructions, article 211.04, which provides $36,500. This discrepancy has not been explained, and an 80% reduction in assistance cannot fail to have dramatic consequences on the disabled veteran and his or her family. While the association accepts this benefit as another small step in the right direction, it once again calls on government to adjust the family caregiver relief benefit to the amount of compensation and benefit instructions, article 211.04, while maintaining the current breadth of applicability and duration of such payments.

The critical injury benefit is another new benefit available to those who have suffered traumatic injury requiring immediate hospital treatment. While it is welcomed as yet another small step toward improving the quality of life for those injured in service to Canada, the government’s rationale for this unexpected benefit has received a mixed response from association members. It appears to exclude those who suffer from operational stress injuries unless those injuries are immediately incapacitating. The history of this type of injury generally carries with it a period of latency, thus denying the benefit’s support to its sufferers.

This differentiation would drive a further wedge between those with physical injuries and those with operational stress injuries, both of which have severe impacts on the families of the injured. Previous strides in gaining acceptance of operational stress injuries as a bona fide injury could be nullified by the proposed immediate physical trauma and later OSI distinctions. While still supported, the association would like further work to occur to close this apparent gap.

I would like to bring a further concern to your attention, namely the frequent references in Bill C-59 to “prescribed sources”, the determination of the value of prescribed sources, “prescribed factors”, and what constitutes a single and sudden occurrence. These, and similar phrases, leave much of the value of the new benefits in doubt.

As occurred in the permanent impairment allowance, Governor in Council regulations so restricted the availability of the benefit to veterans, and limited the majority of approvals to its lowest level, that it had little of its expected impacts. Veterans would like to be assured that the provisions of the new section 2.1 of the new Veterans Charter will be amply reflected in the creation of new regulations and revision of existing ones.

In summary, the members of the association support the provisions of Bill C-59 that seek to amend the new Veterans Charter, and urge its speedy passage through Parliament to royal assent. However, significant gaps remain in the support that disabled veterans need from government. The association wishes to impress on all parliamentarians the importance of these gaps and the speed with which they must be closed.

Thank you for your attention.

Transcript

Discussions (0)