Veterans Affairs Canada's website is undergoing maintenance. If you are experiencing any issues, please contact us. We apologize for the inconvenience this may cause.

Record of Discussion - 18 December 2019

Wednesday, December 18, 2019
Boardroom 1403, 66 Slater Street, Ottawa
10:00 – 16:30 (EST)

Policy Advisory Group Members

  • Keith McAllister, Veterans UN-NATO Canada
  • Major (Retired) Mark Campbell
  • Chief Warrant Officer (Retired) Ray McInnis, Royal Canadian Legion
  • Brigadier General (Retired) Joe Sharpe
  • Commodore (Retired) Andrea Siew (Co-Chair)
  • Brian Forbes, National Council of Veteran Associations in Canada (Co-chair)
  • Master Warrant Officer (Retired) William MacDonald

Regrets (PAG)

  • Lieutenant-General Stephen Bowes, Canadian Armed Forces

Veterans Affairs Canada Officials

  • Steven Harris, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy and Commemoration (Veterans Affairs Canada Co-chair) (Videoconference)
  • Karen Rose, Senior Analyst, Stakeholder Engagement and Outreach

Presenters

  • Jane Hicks, Acting Director General, Pension for Life
  • Fiona Jones, Director, Pension for Life
  • Craig Dalton, Veterans Ombudsman - 2019 Financial Benefits Analysis: Financial Compensation under Pension for Life
  • Rhonda Nicholson, Senior Policy Analyst, Policy and Research (Video-conference)
  • Kristen Johnson, Manager. Re-establishment, Financial Well-Being and Business Intelligence, Service Delivery and Program Management (Video-conference)
  • Stefanie Hoganson, Senior Policy Analyst, Policy and Research (Video-conference)
  • Kim Andrews, A/Director General, Policy and Research (Video-conference)
  • Rory Beck, Manager, Veteran and Family Well-Being Fund and Litigation Coordination, Policy and Research (Video-conference)

Observer

  • Sharon Squire, Deputy Ombudsman, Office of the Veterans Ombudsman

Overview

The Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) Co-chair welcomed the members. A moment of silence was observed to recognize the passing of member Luc O’Bomsawin, who represented Aboriginal Veterans Autochtones, on December 4, 2019.

The VAC Co-chair remarks discussed the reappointment of Minister MacAulay on November 20; the Minister’s mandate letter received December 13th; and that information on advisory group renewal will be shared in 2020.

The Member Co-chairs remarks confirmed the purpose of the meeting; to validate the Policy Advisory Group’s recommendations, and define and prioritize short term objectives based on the mandate letter reference to “ensure that a ‘one Veteran, one standard” approach is upheld. The “one Veteran, one standard” principle was part of the Policy Advisory Group’s presentation in 2016 at the National Stakeholder Summit. The results of the day’s discussion would form the basis of a progress report letter to the Minister.

The Member Co-chairs emphasized that the layering of legislation and incremental changes over the years, without consistent objectives and clearly defined outcomes, has created a complex grid of eligibility criteria, differences in eligibility for benefits depending on when and where served, and inconsistency between policy intent and outcomes and expectations.

Presentations and key discussion points:

Pension for Life

The Acting Director General, Pension for Life presented on the Pension for Life Implementation. The presentation included an overview of the Pension for Life accomplishments to date, including conversion of Veterans from old to new programming, the Supplementary Retirement Benefit payout, the Pain and Suffering Compensation cash out (status and uptake as well as new program processing). Information was also presented on the AGILE project implementation approach used and change management activities.

Discussion included:

  • The high number of Veterans choosing the lump sum payment over a monthly payment. It was noted that front line staff encourage those receiving funds to seek financial advice and the Department provides $500 for financial counselling services.
  • The Pain and Suffering Compensation: the rationale behind the maximum monthly amount of $1,150 and what is a fair and appropriate compensation for pain and suffering.
  • Evaluation of the Pension for Life programs: the effectiveness and outcomes for Veterans and their families. It was noted that the forward agenda for the Audit and Evaluation Division will include Pension for Life.
  • Members underlined as a priority that VAC needs to create a comprehensive program model that treats all Veterans with parallel disabilities in the same manner as to the application of benefits and wellness policies. To achieve this goal, measurable outcomes should be established based on financial security for all injured Veterans and their families, the best possible health outcomes for Veterans, the realization of individual full potential, and the appropriate recognition of service.
  • Members stressed that this new model should include a combination of the best provisions from the Pension Act and the Veterans Well-Being Act to produce a lifetime pension, which will ensure the financial security for those severely injured Veterans who can no longer work because of their service related injuries. This should be based on a progressive income model to ensure fair compensation for life with respect to their projected lost career earnings, as opposed to the nominal 1% increase now provided in Pension for Life.
  • Members indicated, in addition, that the eligibility criteria for the Additional Pain and Suffering Compensation benefit must be amended so that injured Veterans who need this benefit can qualify. Under the current eligibility criteria, the majority of injured Veterans simply will not qualify for this new component of the proposed lifelong pension. Furthermore, the members expressed the view that the Pain and Suffering Compensation benefit granted to the Veterans should be a major determinant of the Additional Pain and Suffering Compensation eligibility, such that the percentage of disability level determined by Pain and Suffering Compensation would provide for a more inclusive and transparent solution to the issue of Additional Pain and Suffering Compensation fairness.
  • The VAC National Survey was raised and that information on level of satisfaction of services is measured. The potential to include specific questions on Pension for Life programs in future surveys was raised.

Caregiver Recognition Benefit

The Senior Policy Analyst, Policy and Research presented on the Caregiver Recognition Benefit. It should be noted that the presentation did not include the Policy Advisory Group’s long-standing recommendation to replace the Caregiver Recognition Benefit with the Pension Act’s Attendance Allowance, which is a more generous, flexible and accessible benefit.

Discussion included:

  • Policy Advisory Group continues to support the 2016 recommendation to introduce a modernized Attendance Allowance payable to informal caregivers.
  • That VAC should better communicate the criteria for the Caregiver Recognition Benefit given the high numbers who apply that are not eligible. This could include promoting the self-assessment tool on the VAC website.
  • The age required to be a caregiver may have to be dropped from 18 to 16 or 17 in order to enable dependents who are living with the Veteran and able to drive to be the caregiver.
  • The Canadian Armed Forces benefit that is a taxable benefit worth $36,000 (but only available for one year) in comparison to VAC’s non-taxable benefit of $12,000, particularly with respect to the emphasis on seamless transition.
  • The Ombudsman’s office noted that they are doing a review of the Caregiver Recognition Benefit, looking at stories and lived experiences and what other jurisdictions are doing. This micro study will be completed in April 2020. Audit and Evaluation is also evaluating Caregiver Recognition Benefit and the report will available in the new year. The Policy Advisory Group requested to be briefed on both reports at a later date.

2019 Financial Benefits Analysis: Financial Compensation under the Pension for Life (Veterans’ Ombudsman)

The Veterans Ombudsman presented some information related to an upcoming report on their 2019 Financial Benefits Analysis that will be available in spring 2020. He indicated that the report will include that they agree with the key conclusions of the Parliamentary Budget Officer Report comparing the three regimes of Veterans benefits. Their report will also include recommendations related to resolving the issue of the 2 to 5% of Veterans that receive less under the Pension for Life, and also the need for a review of the 1% career progression factor in the Pension for Life for loss of income. He also noted that the Office of the Veterans Ombudsman is working on other reports, such as access to the Supplementary Retirement Benefit; compensation for Reservists under the Income Replacement Benefit; and the Caregiver Relief Benefit mentioned earlier.

Discussion included:

  • The need to create an environment of trust through wider conversation, engagement and consultation with Veterans.
  • The need to formalize a model of benefits based on outcomes (what are we trying to achieve) and designing programs and services to realize these outcomes. A reference to the work underway in Australia on this type of model was made.

Education and Training Benefit

The Manager of Re-establishment, Financial Well-Being Intelligence, Service Delivery and Program Management presented on the Education and Training Benefit.

Discussion included:

  • Questions on the benefit and its availability to Veterans who released on or after April 1, 2006 only as it falls under the Veterans Well-Being Act.
  • There continues to be some confusion on the Education and Training Benefit and the relation to SISIP’s Vocational Rehabilitation Program and VAC’s Vocational Rehabilitation and Vocational Assistance Program. It was noted that VAC encourages Veterans to participate in the program that will best meet their needs and could possibly take advantage of all three programs at different times.

Veterans Emergency Fund

The Manager of Re-establishment, Financial Well-Being Intelligence, Service Delivery and Program Management presented on the Veterans Emergency Fund.

Discussion included:

  • Group was supportive of continuing this program and enhancing the funds available as there is a clear need for it and additional funds are required to support the demand. The point was also raised that the program could be added to the general funding model for VAC, with funds available based on the demand as with other VAC benefit programs.
  • The need to find longer term solutions for repeat applicants.
  • It was noted that Audit and Evaluation is evaluating the fund and a final report should be available in late spring.

Veteran and Family Well-Being Fund

The Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy and Commemoration (VAC Co‑chair) with the support of the Manager, Veteran and Family Well-Being Fund and Litigation Coordination, Policy and Research presented on the Veterans Well‑Being Fund with the list for 2018 and 2019.

Discussion included:

  • An evaluation will be part of the process for the future but it is not on the list of evaluations for the Audit and Evaluation Division at this time.
  • It was noted that recipients are expected to report back on an annual basis or by quarter, for certain organizations. VAC has the right to take action if it is not satisfied with how the funds are being used, but this has not been necessary so far.

Closing Remarks

  • Member Co-chairs concluded that VAC has been impacted by government budgetary constraints in implementing Pension for Life and related benefits, which has resulted in inadequate compensation and benefits. In this context, the advisory group was of the opinion that the government has not acknowledged the impact of the increased number of traditional disabled Veterans who have passed on over the last several years resulting in significant savings of VAC’s budgetary funding requirements on the overall VAC budget.
  • Mandate letter commitments and how items raised and/or recommendations that are not identified in the commitments can be realized. It was noted that it would be expected that mandate letter commitments will be given priority for funding.
  • The members noted that a meaningful relationship with the Minister and access to the Minister should be an important aspect of any changes to Ministerial Advisory Groups. The Policy Advisory Group and other advisory groups have had limited access to the Minister.
  • The advisory groups should have an active role at the next National Stakeholder Summit.

Next steps

Based on today’s discussion, the Member Co-chairs will draft a letter to the Minister that will include references to key principles/values and updated recommendations from 2016 based on the information presented at today’s meeting. The drafts will be circulated to the members for comment with the intent that it will be sent to the Minister in January.

Note: The letter was sent to the Minister on January 14th, 2020.

The VAC Co-chair noted that there will be an opportunity to provide the recommendations to the Minister at a later date.

Date modified: