Veterans Affairs Committee on June 17th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much, Ms. Meunier.

I don't know if Mr. Tessier would like to add anything. No? Okay.

We will now go to the first round of questions.

I'm pleased to invite Mr. Richards to go ahead for six minutes, please.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Thank you.

Persian Gulf veterans just want to be recognized as having fought a war. That's what they're looking for. I'll ask a yes-or-no question and I'd like a yes or no answer. Do you consider the Persian Gulf War to be a war?

[Amy Meunier]

We follow the legislation and rules set out by—

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Can you give me a yes or no, please?

[Amy Meunier]

It's not defined as a war.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

That pretty much tells us everything we need to know. That's what they're looking for. Clearly, that's not what we're being told Veterans Affairs is prepared to do. When I asked the minister this same question, she refused to even answer it. I appreciate that you gave an answer. It's the wrong answer, frankly, but it's an answer at least.

Having said that, I move the following motion:

That, given the large workload the committee has on the docket, the committee instruct the Chair to book five meetings during the summer months between July 8 and September 13, while the House is adjourned, to deal with issues such as:

the effects of the cost-of-living crisis on Veterans,

how the poor treatment of Canadian Veterans directly impacts military retention and recruitment,

the scandal surrounding the National Monument to the Mission in Afghanistan,

the growing problem of homelessness amongst Veterans, and

the study concerning Wartime Service designation;

other pressing matters as they emerge.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you so much.

Witnesses, we have to deal with that motion. It was on notice, so we have to discuss it before going to a vote.

Mr. Casey.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Mr. Chair, I had the floor. I wanted to speak to the motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Go ahead.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

A lot of committee time over the last seven months was needed to deal with a host of issues. First of all, there was the monument to the mission in Afghanistan, which could have been dealt with quite easily and quickly. I'll come back to that in just a second. People saw the Liberals trying every way they could to avoid having a vote on that motion. A lot of meetings were used in an attempt to cover up for the Prime Minister.

There are a lot of things the committee needs to deal with. I've listed some of them. It's important that we deal with them. I believe, given all the time that has been used to cover for the Prime Minister, that we should ensure that we continue to work for veterans over the summer. Veterans don't get three months off in the summer. Their needs never stop. We need to deal with those needs and concerns.

I've listed a few topics. I want to speak very briefly to them. I'm certainly hoping that all members will agree and we can pass this motion and get some meetings scheduled this summer.

First, to start from the bottom of the list, is the study concerning the wartime service designation. I want to point out that two separate motions were brought before this committee that we agreed to study. They both related to wartime service designation.

The first was one that I brought forward on February 26, 2023:

That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee conduct a study on the difference in benefit allocations for Veterans with designated war time service vs special mission service.

On November 28 of last year, Wilson Miao also brought forward a motion:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a comprehensive study reviewing (a) the definition of “War”, “Wartime Service”, and “Special Duty Service; and (b) the difference, the process of determining, and criteria for Veteran’s benefits in respect of “Wartime Service” and “Special Duty Service”; that the committee hold a minimum of 4 meetings on this study; and that the committee report its comprehensive findings and recommendations to the House, the Department of National Defense, and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

One would assume that the meeting we're having today is to deal with those motions. However, I note that the study talks about the recognition of Persian Gulf veterans. Nowhere does it mention a very critical aspect of this, which is wartime service. It's the critical thing that veterans of the Persian Gulf War—and it is a war—are asking for. They want their service to be recognized as wartime service, yet nothing in the study we've now begun indicates that it's about wartime service and the recognition of that, which is a very critical element. I know that the Persian Gulf veterans I've spoken to in the time since notice came out are quite upset. They're incredibly upset. They feel like they're being used as pawns.

The Liberal government is trying to avoid dealing with the Afghan monument situation and with the controversy that's been created because of the Prime Minister's interference in the Afghan monument. The way they've tried to do that is by bringing forward this study, which doesn't even address the key point that these veterans of the Persian Gulf War are seeking. We need to get to a study about the wartime service designation. That's something we could be doing during the summer.

Of course, there's the growing problem of homelessness among veterans. This is a problem we're seeing. It affects the entire Canadian population. We're seeing tent cities popping up all over this country in places where you never would have imagined you'd see something like that. With all the effects of the inflationary spending of this Trudeau government and all the effects of the cost of living crisis we're seeing as a result of it, as well as the housing crisis we're experiencing in this country, people are suffering, not the least of whom are veterans.

There are a lot of good organizations out there doing a lot of good work to try to address this issue. I know that we would all agree it needs to be addressed and dealt with. It needs to be done. We need to know what exactly Veterans Affairs is planning to do to be a part of assisting with that and what can be done to ensure that no veteran ever goes homeless.

We should be looking at that. That's something we could be working on. It's an urgent matter, there's no question about it. We're seeing more and more veterans all the time using food banks and without adequate housing or without housing at all. That should never be the case. These people served our country, and we owe it to them to ensure that we take care of them. We need to be looking at that issue.

Of course, I already mentioned the scandal surrounding the national monument to the mission in Afghanistan. We spoke to this at the beginning of the meeting. This is something we all agreed we would undertake to do. They can claim all they want on the other side that we never intended to come up with a decision, that we were just going to discuss it a bit and move on. Come on. Where else in the world and in what other kind of organization would things work that way? It would never fly in the private sector to say we'll have a little discussion about it and then move on; we don't need to make a decision about it. It would never fly anywhere else, and it certainly doesn't fly with veterans.

That's what we should be doing. It hasn't been done, and it needs to be done. We need to get to the bottom of that situation. We need to be working on that.

We can also talk about how the poor treatment of veterans is directly impacting military retention and recruitment. I hear this every single day from veterans. I hear every single day from sitting members of the Canadian Armed Forces about how frustrated they are with the way they're treated, with some of the woke policies of this government and with the fact that veterans, when they get out, are not treated with the respect they deserve. They're not given the benefits they're due. They're constantly facing delays, denials and suggestions that maybe they should consider death.

These are the things that really impact people who are making the decision to serve this country in uniform. They impact those who are currently serving. I hear it every single day, with people saying, “I'm getting out; I'm done. This is just too much. I cannot handle that this government is not showing any respect for either our veterans or our serving members.” We have sitting members of the Canadian Armed Forces, current serving members, who are using food banks and who are homeless. That should never be the case. We need to be addressing that issue.

Of course, there are the effects of the cost of living crisis on veterans, the things we all see and hear about every single day from Canadians across this country, but even more so from veterans. If there was one group of people you would think had a priority when ensuring that we take care of every need and that they have what they require to live their lives, it would be our veterans, those who served this country. They were prepared to put their lives on the line and they did put their lives on the line. They were prepared to lay down their lives for their country. The least their country and their government can do for them following that service is make sure they're there for them and they're willing to provide what they need.

These are all incredibly important issues that we need to be addressing. There have been a lot of meetings wasted in an attempt to cover up for the Prime Minister. It's time that we get down to work. That means meeting over the course of the summer, for five meetings at minimum, I would suggest. We could do even better than that.

That's the motion I move. I hope that it will have the support of all members of this committee. This is an opportunity for the government members to make up for the time they've wasted. This is an opportunity for the NDP and the Bloc to be there on behalf of veterans. We need to know where everyone stands. Are they here to go on vacation with the Prime Minister or are they here to work for veterans? That's what we're going to vote on today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you so much.

We have three people on the list: Mr. Casey, Mrs. Wagantall and Mr. Dowdall.

Mr. Casey.

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Out of respect for the witnesses who have come here to present to us and inform us on the topic at hand, I move that debate on the motion now be adjourned.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

I have no choice. I have to go to a vote.

Mr. Clerk, please take the vote on the adjournment of debate.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

The debate on the motion was adjourned.

We'll pick up where we left off with the witnesses.

Mr. Richards, we had three minutes left on the clock.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I suppose that wasn't surprising, but it's certainly disappointing. We need to be working on behalf of veterans this summer. I guess there's an unwillingness among the other parties to do so. The Conservatives were prepared to do the work that's necessary.

Having said that, I would like to move the following motion:

That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee conduct a study on the effect of Veterans Affairs Canada policies on military recruitment.

I want to make it clear that this is an important study. However, what I would like to be doing is resuming debate on the motion we're supposed to be addressing, first and foremost, based on the agreement we had as a committee: the Prime Minister's interference in the Afghan monument situation and trying to make sure we get the proper respect and recognition for our Afghan veterans. Unfortunately, to resume debate on that, I would have to move a motion that would immediately be voted on. We already know, based on the vote we just saw, that we would have a refusal to do that. That's unfortunate because that is what this committee agreed to do. It's what we should be doing—making sure we show our Afghan veterans the respect they deserve.

Instead, I'm moving a motion that we conduct a study on the effect of Veterans Affairs Canada's policies on military recruitment. That's incredibly important. I just spoke about it. We hear every single day from veterans across this country and from serving members of the Canadian Armed Forces that they are incredibly frustrated with the lack of respect and service they receive from Veterans Affairs Canada. Serving members feel they have a government that isn't providing the equipment and tools they need, or showing them the respect they deserve. In fact, we're seeing many of them use food banks. We hear reports all across this country of veterans and serving members of the Canadian Armed Forces having to use food banks. We hear about homeless serving members of the Canadian Armed Forces and veterans. All of these things have a major impact on the willingness to serve in this country.

We want to pull our weight in the world. We want to be taken seriously in the world. It's unfortunate that under this Prime Minister, every single time there's an international summit or meeting of any kind, we are not taken seriously anywhere in the world. It's because we're not willing to step up and pull our weight. The men and women who serve this country do it with pride. They're among the best military members in the entire world. The quality of the people who serve in our Canadian Armed Forces is absolutely top-notch. However, the way they're treated, the equipment they're provided and the recognition and respect they get are not equal to what they deserve or to what they need in order to do their jobs properly.

Seeing the way veterans are treated makes anyone looking to get into our Canadian Armed Forces question that decision. It makes them wonder why they would want to serve their country. It makes those who are currently serving wonder the same: “Why do I continue to do this?” Of course, most of them will continue to serve despite all those things because it's something they're proud to do. It's something they do to honour their country. They serve their country. Despite what they're seeing from the current government, they're still willing to serve. They're still willing to put their lives on the line, but boy, it would sure be nice if they were given the equipment and tools they need and if as veterans they were given the respect and recognition they deserve.

I'll return to the motion previously at hand about the Afghan mission monument. It's a terrible situation, but it's a great example of exactly what we're talking about.

It's probably best that I give a bit of background on this for those watching this meeting. We have a situation where, despite the fact that we're 10 years past the end of that mission, there still hasn't been a monument constructed.

Shortly after the mission ended, it was announced by the previous Conservative government that a monument would be built to honour those who served in that mission and, in particular, to honour the 158 Canadians who gave their lives serving our country in Afghanistan. However, here we are. This government has been in power for nine years and nothing has been done.

They announced a competition to award the design contract for that monument, and the jury process set up by the government to do that, which is an internationally recognized process, was completed. Then, in November 2021, that decision was communicated to then minister of veterans affairs and then minister of Canadian heritage. The recommendations made by the two departments in question were that this be awarded to a company out of Quebec, Daoust, and that it be announced as quickly as possible.

Over the course of roughly the next year and a half—maybe a little more than a year and a half, in fact—we were able to receive documents, although there were a lot of redactions, and were able to determine that interference had occurred in that process and that the Prime Minister's Office and the Privy Council Office were involved. A number of meetings were held and discussions were had. One would have to assume that whatever those meetings and discussions were about, they led to the decision to change the decision.

The jury made a decision to award the contract, and when it was announced in June of last year, finally, a year and a half later—

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Excuse me, Mr. Richards. I have a point of order.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

My point of order is on relevance, Mr. Chair.

I'm wondering if Mr. Richards can indicate to the committee whether he has a sense of how long his intervention might be, if it is going to continue. Of course, he has the right to talk as long as he wishes, but if it is going to continue at length, I would recommend that we dismiss the witnesses and not waste their time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. May.

As you just said, he has the right to discuss the motion. If he wants to answer you directly, he will.

Mr. Richards, we'll go back to you.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I don't think that was a point of order, Chair, and I acknowledge your ruling as such.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

On a point of order, Chair, my original point of order was on relevance. I wonder if the chair can address that.

Again, let's respect the witnesses who are here today. We are coming up to almost 12 o'clock and have not had an opportunity to ask a question. I'm wondering whether Mr. Richards can let us know if we will have that opportunity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. May.

Regarding relevance, I'm listening closely to his intervention. It's still about veterans and military recruitment.

Stay on that, please, Mr. Richards.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I certainly am. I'm speaking directly to the issue contained in the motion, which is the effect of Veterans Affairs Canada's policies on military recruitment.

One of the things we're referring to—and there are a number of them I want to speak to—is the way veterans were treated in relation to the Afghan monument. I'm obviously providing the background to show how that happened. I appreciate that the members on the other side are listening. Hopefully, something I say will be compelling enough to make them realize it's time to stop covering for the Prime Minister and start working on behalf of the veterans who served this country. That is the plea I make, and I hope that Liberal members and all members of the committee are listening, because we need to deal with this issue and a number of other things.

I'll come back to where I was. In the period of time from November 2021 to June 2023, all of this interference took place, and it led to—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

It's not funny. Liberal members are laughing about the interference by the Prime Minister. It's not funny at all because veterans deserve the recognition they're seeking. If you think it's funny that they're not getting it, that's pathetic. I hope you don't find humour in the fact that veterans are not being recognized. That's sad.

Over the course of a year and a half, we saw interference take place, and it led to a different decision being announced. There's been no proper explanation of what exactly took place. What this committee was seeking to do with this motion was get to the bottom of that and ask for documents, unredacted, that would show the communications that took place and exactly why the Prime Minister's Office felt there was a need to change the decision.

One would assume that if there was a good reason for that, it would be a pretty easy motion to deal with. They could provide the documents and show what the reasons were, and we'd get the monument built and move on. Then we could deal with all the other things that are important to veterans. However, that hasn't happened. For some reason, what we've seen instead—

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Excuse me, Mr. Richards. Mr. Sarai has a point of order.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Mr. Chair, we had a lot of committee business when these types of things should have been discussed—what study to do and the motions tabled earlier. We had quite a few meetings with respect to deciding on those things. Doing that today is a disservice to all those who served in the Persian Gulf. They've been waiting and lobbying us for a long time to discuss and study it. For the Conservative Party to derail their study, talk about—