NDVA Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL DEFENCE AND VETERANS AFFAIRS

COMITÉ PERMANENT DE LA DÉFENSE NATIONALE ET DES ANCIENS COMBATTANTS

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Thursday, January 29, 1998

• 1738

[English]

The Chairman (Mr. Robert Bertrand (Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, Lib.)): Order.

The way we usually do it is we have a list of presenters who will start the discussion. We have two microphones, microphone one and microphone two. After the presenters have finished, it's open to whoever else in the room would like to come up and say what's on their mind.

We'll get going right away. The first presenter is Warrant Officer Bill Reid.

Warrant Officer Bill Reid (Individual Presentation): Probably one of the first questions that went through the mind of everybody in this room I'd like to present to you now.

To set the stage for today's verbal submission, I would like to have someone on the committee explain to those present how this particular committee feels it is going to be more effective or have more input than the myriads of surveys, commissions, working groups, and studies we've seen already.

I will use a phrase that came out of some of my notes from meetings when we were preparing for your arrival; that is, we want to believe, we really do, but the general perception of these committees is that they are a waste of time and money. The report is written and archived and virtually nobody looks at it.

• 1740

I would like to hear a response as to why this would not be considered to be yet another empty exercise.

The Chairman: I'll take just a couple of minutes to respond.

I can assure you that the report hasn't been written yet. The Minister of National Defence, Mr. Eggleton, has asked us to go around and to get the people's ideas on how to improve the quality of life.

I was told at lunchtime that there had been quite a few other people from NDHQ and some other groups who went around and asked for your opinions but nothing was done with it. I can't comment on that, because I don't know who did them or whatever happened to them.

But I can tell you that as members of this committee we take our work very seriously and we don't do this just to spend taxpayers' money. If we're going to write a report, I, as chairman, expect that it will not be placed in a cupboard somewhere where it will be forgotten. There's too much time, effort, and money put into these things not to act upon it.

Our report will be written up. We will be making recommendations. Whether the government accepts all of our recommendations.... That's a job that has MPs on all sides of the House, who will have to push government to accept as many as possible.

Is there anything else to add, John?

Mr. John Richardson (Perth—Middlesex, Lib.): I really would just like to say this. In the first Parliament, from 1993 to 1997, we undertook a very major examination of the forces and the restructure. It was in depth. It was a joint committee with the Senate as well.

The report made a large number of recommendations to be implemented over time. It was accepted by the government and it became the basis of the white paper that drives the armed forces today.

I think we're hearing good testimony, honest testimony of frustration, and we'll reflect that. We are here with goodwill, both the opposition parties and the government, to do the very best for you. On that basis, when we deliver that report to the minister and ask him to take it to cabinet for acceptance by the government, we will then know whether we'll have had a lot of success in having the government understand what the feeling is among people in the armed forces.

The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Richardson.

Mr. Hanger.

Mr. Art Hanger (Calgary Northeast, Ref.): You asked a very important question, because it deals with more than what this committee has been sent to do. There is a realization that all of us here had better come to grips with.

The committee is very weak, really, when it comes right down to the fact.

We're not masters of our own destiny, number one. If we see some major shortcomings in an issue for which we are trying to determine some solutions, we do not have the power to bring some of those very significant things to the forefront.

What will happen with this committee is that we will all gather information from across this country and compile it into a report, which will then go to the Minister of National Defence and will then go to the cabinet. In there will be the Treasury Board and the finance minister, who holds the purse-strings. They will make some decisions.

Many of the issues that you are talking about here reflect right into the Treasury Board: let's get rid of some of the policy and the guidelines and the taxing situation dealing with the finance minister.

• 1745

As an opposition member, I think—and I know this is shared by my colleagues, and even by some on the government side here on this committee—an injustice has been done when it comes to the military. There has not been fair play; that's the bottom line.

I can say it as an opposition member, loud and clear, and I think I have a responsibility to say it. The problem is when the government side stand up, they are putting themselves in a more delicate position, pure and simple, because it could cost them a job on this committee or it could cost them, if they are persistent, their being booted right out of the committee or out of the caucus. That's our parliamentary system. It isn't exactly a just one, as far as I'm concerned.

So as an opposition member, I think we have a very serious responsibility to make sure the public knows about what has happened here. Just over the last five visits to different locations, military installations in this country, it is evident that there has been an abuse of military personnel and their families in the areas of pay and accommodation. Some of them are living in trash that not even welfare recipients in this country who are on the bottom end of the scale, or the prisoners of the country, would live in. When we listen to what has happened over in Griesbach barracks and places like that, it's disgusting; and that has been going on for years. So we have a responsibility, all right, to get the message out.

I've been on radio since we started in Esquimalt. As an opposition member, I have a responsibility to make sure the message does get out. The government side may not always have that, because they are in a different position. Whether they step out of that mould or not is up to them, but it's going to be a tough row to hoe. We have to sell that up there, and the only way we're going to do it is by putting pressure on them through the public. I think the public should be made very much aware of what has happened to the military over the last few years.

Those are all my comments. For the most part the committee is rather weak. Our recommendations will be strong, and I think we're all in unison when it comes to some of the concerns, but the delivery is going to be very key.

The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Hanger.

Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit (Lakeland, Ref.): I just wanted to add a bit to what Art has said.

You asked why this committee would be different from any other in the past. In fact, there was a fairly good report overall from the committee in 1994. But what has really changed as a result of it?

On what is in the report, if the main committee report doesn't state what we've heard, then we will submit an opposition report. What we hear will go into the report. The real question then is what changes will be made? Of course that's a matter of decisions, as Mr. Hanger said, choices on the part of government. There is a limited amount of money, but there are many other areas of spending that can be cut to accommodate reasonable military spending. It's a matter of tough choices. It's a matter of setting priorities. We've had a government that, quite frankly, just hasn't put the military as a top priority, as it should be. That's what has to change for anything more to come of this committee travelling than committees in the past. It's a matter of government and how they really feel about the military and the choices they make about how they are going to spend our money; taxpayers' money.

The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Pratt.

Mr. David Pratt (Nepean—Carleton, Lib.): I'm not sure I can add much to what has already been said on this, but I think it is worth reiterating, as Mr. Bertrand has said, that the minister asked for us to do this work. I personally think the minister is very sympathetic to the plight of members of the Canadian Forces.

I can say that before this committee started its work I personally considered myself an advocate for the armed forces. Everything I've heard thus far has just increased my strength of feeling that way. But apart from a personal commitment, we also have an obligation to explain the situation to our own caucus, in my case the Liberal caucus, as well as to Parliament as a whole.

As Mr. Hanger said, I would like to see us...because I think we are going to come up with some fairly strong recommendations, and I think in some quarters, whether in the public or on the higher floors at DND, those recommendations are going to be considered radical. Some people may feel very uncomfortable with some of the things we're going to say.

• 1750

This is something on which I would certainly like to see the committee speak with one voice, because I think it's absolutely too important to have politics played with it.

I'll leave it at that.

The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Pratt.

Ms. Longfield.

Ms. Judi Longfield (Whitby—Ajax, Lib.): I come to this committee with perhaps the least background in what was happening with the Canadian Forces, and I can tell you, in the very short period of time that I've been involved with this committee.... I can assure you that my top priority when I get back is to convey to the residents of my riding the treatment that you have been receiving, the deplorable conditions in which you're living in many situations, what we're asking you to do with very little. I consider it to be my duty to help convince members of the Liberal caucus to get on board and to support the recommendations of this committee. We can only do it one riding at a time, and I, for one, will do everything in my power to gain much support for the kind of assistance you people deserve.

The Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Longfield.

Mr. Price.

Mr. David Price (Compton—Stanstead, PC): In answer to your question, the big difference with this committee is we are an all-party committee and it is the standing committee on defence. It has not really, to my mind, in many, many years, travelled directly to the people on quality of life issues. They've checked on everything else, but quality of life hasn't really been touched.

In my personal background I was a mayor before I took on this job. We find this type of meeting where, instead of bringing hand-picked people to you—and this is no insult to the officers at all, but usually it does mean officers when you bring people—we're talking to everybody right across all of the ranks.... It's much easier for you also to stand there and talk to us when you're surrounded by your peers. It eases things off a little bit.

I have to congratulate you, even before hearing the group here, like what we went through last night. I found the military was very controlled in the feelings and the high tensions that we went through at Edmonton last night. In a town hall type of meeting, probably chairs would have been thrown. I have to congratulate the military; they handle themselves very well, but do get the word across.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thanks, David.

Our second speaker is Warrant Officer Fenton.

Warrant Officer Mark Fenton (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, committee members, Mayor Coates, Colonel Guidinger.

I'd like to thank the committee for this opportunity to say a few words on my favourite subject, and that is alternate service delivery. Chief Warrant Officer Scott has already given a very good introduction to that, but, for a more personal aspect, I'm going to give you a few of my perspectives on this.

The written submission I've given you covers a wider range of subjects, but I'll be concentrating just on the ASD at this time.

I'm currently managing the automated test equipment laboratory here at 4 Wing Cold Lake. The laboratory is what I call second-line function, the first line being what the honourable members saw in Aviano, Italy, where the airplanes are—the front-line stuff. The technicians operate, they fix the airplanes, but when the boxes break and the equipment breaks, it comes to second-line facilities, where we actually fix the equipment. My laboratory does things like the radar, mission computers, displays, and things of that nature.

Currently the air force has a significant amount of expertise in technological areas such as electronics, and mechanical areas as well, in the various second-line shops that exist. The technicians for the most part are very highly trained professionals who take great pride in the work they do and do it extremely well.

I fear that this level of expertise is going to be systematically deteriorated through alternate service delivery.

Alternate service delivery, as you know, is the contracting out of a certain function to somebody who can theoretically do it more cheaply or more effectively.

There have been some very good ASD initiatives, such as the Canadian Forces Housing Agency. In my opinion it's done a very good job, and I'm very pleased with what it has done compared to the previous administration.

• 1755

With ASD of second-line capabilities, or the threat of it, comes the threat of the degradation of the ability of the air force to integrate new technologies. We live in a day when technology is exploding. It's continually changing. We need people who have the technological brains to keep up with these changes. But I think we're going backwards in that perspective.

The reason I'm here right now is that, as you've probably heard, the automated test equipment lab, or portions of it, is slated for alternative service delivery. To give you a background on this lab that's about to be ASDed, in the last four years my lab and my personnel have taken a number of initiatives, voluntarily. They have re-engineered and cut staff to the tune of $2.3 million annually. For one small lab that's significant. We took over a function that used to be operated by a civilian contractor, saving about $500,000 a year. At the same time we increased the amount of equipment types that could be fixed from 300 types to 1,200 types. That was while we saved the $500,000 a year.

Just one more example. One of our pieces of test equipment had a significant problem with it. On the weekend, on his spare time, one of my technicians designed a fix for it that cost $10. Some $60,000 had already been spent on the original equipment manufacturer, who could not fix that equipment.

There are many more initiatives. I could go on for hours like this, but I know I have limited time.

In November 1996 the Auditor General visited Cold Lake, and in his case study of 4 Wing's maintenance policy he identified the maintenance policy of Cold Lake, the managers, and the technicians at all levels as being very progressive and innovative in their thinking. He said we had done everything possible to reduce the costs of operation. He termed the results “impressive”. The Auditor General, as we know, is not known for giving glowing reports on government organizations, and we were quite proud of this, since it validated our efforts. Even so, parts of my labs are going to be given off to alternative service delivery, even after an in-house bidding process determined that maintaining it with military personnel was the best way to do it.

So why is it being ASDed? Well, I'm told our infrastructure, our headquarters, do not have the ability to manage the obsolescence of the equipment properly; also, our supply system and our transportation system are inadequate to fill the needs of the air force under the scenarios that were examined. Of course headquarters does not have the ability to manage obsolescence any more, even though the life cycle managers have that as their primary function. Headquarters has been slashed to the bone. They do not have the resources or personnel to do this job any more.

The supply system and transportation system have felt cuts as well. The numbers of supply techs on this base have been cut so drastically I can't even begin to think what the percentage is, but it's high. The technicians, the supply techs, and the transport people are doing as good a job as possible with what they have, but what they have is getting less and less all the time.

It's also my belief that when this function is ASDed, although they are going to be taking over a higher amount of functions—repair of equipment, obsolescence management, procurement of equipment—it's a higher cost than we would have paid had we kept this as a military function and given ourselves sufficient people and the mandate to do the job. Our people who are operating these functions are the best to be had. Industry knows that, because it has openly said, if we win this, we want to hire your people right out of your lab, because nobody else can do the job.

About the supply system, which was cited as one example, what is more vital to a military fighting force than a supply system? If the supply system is inadequate to handle these functions on a normal static basis, then don't we think it needs to be revamped to support us properly in times of combat?

Of course it's very easy—well, maybe not so easy—for some governments to have taken us from the 90,000-plus point down to approximately 60,000. It may be very easy for somebody to stand up in Parliament and happily say, guess what, I've just taken 1,000 military people out of uniform; there's your peace dividend for the Berlin Wall falling. Are they going to say out of the other side of their mouth that it may cost more to do this function with somebody else, but because an arbitrary level of 60,000 has been set, we have to do what we can with those we have left?

• 1800

So, instead, the air force's capabilities, the technological skill-set of the technicians, are going to degrade and to continue to degrade.

This is happening in my lab, or potentially going to happen, and after it happens to my lab, I can see it happening to places like the engine base, component shops, several other mechanical and electrical functions.

The morale implications of this are very significant. I've already told you some of the laurels, the pats on our back that our lab has got for doing these things, all of which they did on their own without any extra bonuses or attaboys. They do these things for the knowledge that the job they did was for the good of the air force, to help it reduce its budget. We did our share, and I think actually more than our share.

The technicians showed an extreme amount of loyalty to the air force, who may not be showing the same loyalty in return. Or maybe it's not the air force; maybe it's at a higher level that loyalty is not being shown. I say this because the message that's going out to the troops is, “Thanks for the work. You've cut our costs. You did a great job. We don't need you any more.”

They do this on a daily basis. They are regularly devising new and efficient repair schemes for equipment. This is what they do for a living. This is their challenge. This is the raison d'être. They love doing this. But the technicians don't know what the future is going to hold for them.

Many people who work at the first line of the squadrons—not all, but some—look forward to an occasional rotation through a second line shop. Work at the squadrons at the first line can be very stressful. It's a hectic pace. They spend a lot of time away from home: three months in Aviano.... Although I'm sure there could be worse places to be deployed, the family stress is significant, and I'm certain that wasn't the only deployment for those people in that year.

So what happens if we remove these second-line functions, if they're all civilianized out? What we're looking at is people spending a much higher percentage of their time in the first-line organizations, with more stress, more time away from home. If we think the problems of social work and psychiatry are bad now, wait for it.

Additionally, we won't be able to retain people who are more technologically inclined. We've got some great people right now who really know what they're doing. They love what they're doing. If we take away some of those technological challenges, some of them, yes, will stay, but most of them or a large portion of them will probably look elsewhere.

Companies are recruiting at a frantic pace. We see this in the paper. We've seen Hughes, Harris, Bombardier, Lockheed Martin, amongst others, advertising in local papers, and a lot of our people are taking serious looks at this, the big reason being what's happening with the air force. The mentality is, why be the last person into the lifeboat of a ship that is sinking rapidly?

One of the saddest things about all this is when I talk to my peers, my fellow managers in the squadron, people who are in charge of other second-line functions. We have been through the ASD process for approximately three and a half years now. We've put a significant effort into our ability to save money and in actually fighting these bids head to head with an in-house bid. The other managers look and they say that there is no incentive for their people in their shops to take the same kind of innovative action. There's no incentive for the managers to try to fight the ASD bids off, because if they look at the reasoning for why we potentially will be losing this, what's the use? It's predestined and there will be no choice in the matter.

The bottom line is if you want a military to fight the next war, whether that war be in Europe or against the forces of Mother Nature, if we keep ASDing out functions, we're not going to have those people.

During the ice storm a call went here on this base for 500 series electrical technicians. Those are our people with the electronic expertise.

The technicians who work in my lab are some of the most highly skilled professionals I've ever had the pleasure to work with. They work very well. Many of them, like myself, still believe that the uniform fits pretty well. We want to continue to wear it for a number of years yet, but sometimes it's getting harder and harder to see that year after year.

I joined the service at a time when wearing a uniform was considered to be an honourable profession. There have been many ups and downs over the last four or five years that have made me question whether that is still true. It's only slightly mitigated by the successes we've had in the two floods and the ice storms. It's pretty bad when we have to rely on disasters to build up our morale and our public image. It should not be so.

• 1805

Sometimes it feels as if we're just another government organization, to be cut at the will of Parliament, with no real vision of what a military needs. It seems the only certainty left in the military is continued uncertainty.

What is going to befall the future of the air force if we lose these functions and the technicians and we have to assimilate new technologies in the future? As we know, and as I said, technology is changing continually. If we lose all this expertise we're going to have a hard time integrating these new functions.

Keep in mind that these technicians the air force spends a lot of time and effort training and bringing up to a high standard of technological excellence are the same people who get out or retire after a while and move into the civilian sector. The military has in large part fed the civilian economy in electronics and avionics and a lot of the other mechanical worlds for many years. If the air force starts doing that, then a lot of the training base for the Canadian public also disappears.

Don't get the opinion that I am against civilian companies or corporate Canada. I'm not. Our corporate structure in this country plays a very important role in Canada's defence team. But then again, so do the technicians who do the job on the floor. The thing is that we have to make sure this balance is met, and not just because we've been told we have to cut down to this level, make it happen—and then we scramble to do it in the most damage-controlled way possible. We have to find a partnership that is actually the best way to go ahead.

Morale. In my opinion, morale in the forces is at a very low point, as I said, because of the Somalia incident and a lot of the other bad press. They weren't felt just in other areas. Everybody who wore a uniform felt that in one form or another. I actually had corporals tell me they were ashamed to wear their uniform in public. It was a few years ago when this was at its peak, but that is a very sad state of affairs, for a uniformed person wearing Her Majesty's uniform to feel that way.

The question in my mind is who is looking out for the military? We don't have Daryl Bean of the public servants looking out for us. We're not Canada Post. We can't go on strike before Christmas just to mess everybody up. Right?

The military, by its very existence and its nature, serves in silence. We're not the ones who like to go out and grab the headlines. We're not asking for big headlines or medals for everybody, but respect from the general population would certainly be nice.

As Warrant Officer Reid commented in his question, I'm leery whether SCONDVA will actually have any use. Don't bother answering that question again. You've already answered it to the best of your ability. As they say, the proof is in the pudding. We'll see.

One other comment I would like to make is that SCONDVA, as I understand it, is an all-party committee dedicated to trying to do the best to improve the military, in this case quality of life. Am I correct about the mandate?

Okay. Then I also find that discussions that seem to be out-of-season electioneering and partisan politics are inappropriate and an insult to this audience.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Mr. Benoit, did you have a question?

Mr. Leon Benoit: Just one short question. Just for clarification, again, why do you think alternate service delivery is winning out over in-house services more often than seems to make sense?

WO Mark Fenton: There are several factors, and each case would be unique, sir. If you had asked me six months ago, I would have been convinced it was politics at various levels and lobbying by various special interest groups. In our particular case right now, I am convinced we shot ourselves in the foot through.... Let me rephrase that. We shot ourselves in the foot as the government handed us the gun. We had to cut down to such an extent, and headquarters was chopped to a much larger extent than others. People at my rank level work in those headquarters positions trying to manage the equipment we work on, trying to get the spare parts, trying to find substitutes for equipment that's obsolete, and they don't have the resources to do that any more. That was one of the major reasons I was given: that we cannot do this, so maybe we should hire somebody who specializes in it.

• 1810

As for other ASD initiatives, I can't really say what the driving factors were, even for this one. This is my own opinion. However, there are other functions that are being potentially targeted for ASD on this wing and elsewhere, and the morale issues are very widespread.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, sir.

Corporal Macumber.

Corporal Martin Macumber (Individual Presentation): About a year ago my wife was posted to Edmonton. Her trade is supply, and from what I understand it's become part of their policy that these supply technicians do a portion of their time in the field. During this past year we've tried several options on having her moved back up here. I've been up and down the chain of command several times, when I was in 410 Squadron as well as 1AMS. Everyone has been very helpful, very sympathetic. They've all tried really hard to have her moved back up here, but to no avail. The career manager has decided no, this will not happen.

Since her time in 1 Service Battalion she has been to the field, but because she's not TQ5 qualified, she cannot be gainfully employed. So she was unable to do a lot of the positions that she has applied for and volunteered for. She is willing to do her field time, SOSA, but we'd like to be together instead of apart. As some of the other people have mentioned, it is a four-hour drive and we make it on the week-ends.

This posting could have been a lot worse. My wife could have been posted to Petawawa, Gagetown, places a lot worse than that. At least Edmonton is still in the province and it is a drive that we can make on the week-ends, weather permitting.

As I mentioned earlier, she's not trying to get out of her field time. She has applied several times for them, as well as NATO tours to Bosnia and to the Golan Heights, places like that. But because she's not QL5 they will not take her.

As I mentioned, we have both been up the chain of command trying to have this changed. On her side, she has put memos in asking for compassionate posting, things along that line. When she got the memo back from her commanding officer of, I think, 1 Service Battalion, he put a minute on it that it be requested that she go and see the base social worker. When she went to see the base social worker, he was more than willing to help her with her compassionate release, not the compassionate posting. That has been the general tone on the field side, to help her along with the release more than with anything else. They have not budged in any way in helping her to come up here.

I must say on my side, though, my supervisors have been really good about giving me time off and things like that.

Since she's not QL5 qualified, she has been shuffled around from section to section. Now she's working with 1 ASG, which is a static posting, not a field posting. She still seems to float from section to section. They're not sure what to do with her with that.

The posting, we were told, will be for a minimum of three years. We're not sure how long it's going to be. We have two young children, six and seven years old. They seem to think Christmas comes every two to four months, so trying to explain three to four years to them....

The cost to my family has been quite extensive. We used up a fair bit of our savings travelling back and forth between Edmonton and Cold Lake. I recently went on course in Trenton for three months, and my children had to go to stay with their grandmother for four months so they could go to school, because my wife was unable to look after them in Edmonton because she stays in barracks. That was very expensive. To provide child care in Regina is quite high. It was around $800 a month. It was quite a strain on the family as well as on my mother-in-law while they were down there.

• 1815

On top of that, there are the normal expenses. Now we have two phone bills—she must have a phone—cable, the gas back and forth from Edmonton to here, and for my travel down. We're pretty much maintaining two households, although my wife does live in barracks down there. When we do go down and visit, we either have to stay in a hotel or we can stay in a room that is approximately 12 feet by 12 feet. So imagine four people staying in there for the weekend.

Also, I'm pretty sure it's the policy in the garrison of Edmonton that people of the opposite sex are not permitted to spend the night in the barracks, so we're sort of breaking the rules. I'm not sure about that. That's how it was when I was in the infantry. I know I got into trouble a couple of times.

Presently I'm being employed as a non-destructive inspector. To the best of my knowledge, there is no position for me in Edmonton for someone with my training. I've worked very hard to get this training. A lot of it I've done on my own. To get this trade it took me a very long time. For me to give up to go to another trade and follow her down to Edmonton would be very bad.

We're talking about saving money and working on a most efficient organization. The cost to the crown to keep my wife down in Edmonton just for one person is approximately $300 for rations and quarters. I'm not sure of the exact figures. I am gathering all this together and I'll be sending you a very detailed letter in the mail listing everyone we've talked to, photocopies of the paperwork we have submitted, dates, times, and some of the general tone of the conversation, as well as some more figures. But the cost is approximately $300 a month for rations and quarters.

We are given $120 a month separation entitlement, which helps offsets the cost of travelling back and forth from Edmonton as well as the phone bill. The phone bill.... We do use the tie-lines on a regular basis, but the calls are kept quite short. So imagine just talking to your wife for about 15 or 20 minutes each night and letting the kids on. It doesn't sound like a bad idea, only 15 minutes talking to your wife, but it's hard to maintain the family.

When you are on a separated posting—I'm not sure of the proper term for this—you're entitled to one LTA trip home per year. Unfortunately, we live too close to Edmonton, so we do not claim this. I think they take the first 500 miles off and then after that you get low rates. I will be getting all the exact figures on this and I will be sending it to you in the mail.

Also another cost that is incurred by the crown is the half month's posting allowance. It is also given to the person when they're first posted to Edmonton. If they ever happen to put us back together then we'll incur that cost as well. So that's half a month's salary of whatever standard of pay a corporal makes. I'm not sure of that.

There are probably other costs that are also absorbed through the crown. I know for myself I do miss a bit of work, having to go to the school to pay for hot lunch programs, to pay for child care and things like that. Plus, on her side, she's going to collect the separation entitlement. I can't even think of the other costs that have been incurred administratively just to try to maintain a person down there unaccompanied.

As I mentioned earlier, it is a long drive from Edmonton to Cold Lake. The law of averages is we're bound to have an accident over three years. That's something that's always in the back of my mind.

At present I'm aware of about five families up here that are in the same situation as we are. Last summer, when I was in 410 Squadron, there were three families, including myself, who were living this lifestyle. Since then one family has been reunited, but imagine just in one squadron three families on a company posting. How many other bases are there, squadrons, battalions, etc., with the same situation?

• 1820

I do understand that when you become a member of the Canadian Forces this can happen. I grew up in the military. My father was a chief warrant officer in the infantry. He was gone quite a bit. But when we're talking about nowadays, quality of life and trying to improve morale and everything, this is the wrong way to go about it. If we're trying to save money, this is one way we're burning it. We're not saving any money here. It's about $4,800 a year just to keep my wife down there with rations, quarters, and separation allowance.

That's about all I have to say. Thank you for your time.

The Chairman: I believe there are a couple of panellists who have questions. David, please.

Mr. David Pratt: Corporal, I had dinner with your wife last night in Edmonton, and she told me....

Voices: Oh, oh!

Mr. David Pratt: I frankly couldn't imagine maintaining a family relationship under the circumstances that you obviously do. With the emotional cost and the financial cost it must be extremely difficult.

I guess my question isn't so much to you as to the committee. We do have some representatives from DND here. I don't know if they have the information to the question I have, but I would be interested in knowing how many couples right across the Canadian Forces are in exactly the same situation, and exactly what the policy is with respect to going that extra mile to see if they can be somehow reunited. I think in some cases it may be necessary from an operational standpoint, but if there is something that can possibly be done to bring people together, to bring married couples together, I think it should be done, clearly. I think it would be useful for us to know what the magnitude of the problem is and then try to attack it on that basis.

Cpl Martin Macumber: Sir, with regard to your comment about across Canada, while I was in Trenton on course I was constantly bumping into people who are in the same situation, and that's just people I worked with. I'm sure there are more people here on the base, other than the five I'm aware of, who are living like this. I could see if there was a real operational requirement for my wife to be down there, then sure, go ahead. But she's a corporal supply technician. They're a dime a dozen. There are tons coming out of Borden constantly.

We submitted a list of names of people who are willing to go down to Edmonton who wanted out of Cold Lake. One of them, the wife needed to go to a cancer clinic, from what I understand. I don't know the person personally; they just approached us saying they would like to go down there, since his wife had medical problems. Yet the career manager would not entertain this. So we have tried. We have submitted names, things like that.

The Chairman: Thank you. I just got the nod, and we will be getting that information from NDHQ.

Mr. Benoit, you had a question.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I have two questions. One I think you probably can't give the answer to is whether this is a common practice. You've explained what you've seen here.

The military is putting on a real push to have women join the forces on the one hand, and yet on the other hand they're willing to split families apart under circumstances that seem avoidable. Do you believe that the people who make the decisions on this could come up with another solution that would solve this problem quite readily?

Cpl Martin Macumber: I'm really not sure, sir. I know, and this is just my opinion, that the career manager has a board of numbers and he has slots to fill. He just takes my number, whatever it might be, a service number or position number, and says this person is going there. That's how he looks at it. I'm not sure if he goes any further along to see if these are service couples. It might be just one individual who is fed up with the system and if they have to live that way, they're going to do it to everyone else.

• 1825

I really don't know how it can be changed. If they do take the time to actually look at each person's case before they post them, there are going to be a lot of hours. I'm not sure how they can change it. I'm sure it is quite time-consuming when they do decide how to post someone and if they are going to split up a service couple.

Mr. Leon Benoit: The person you mentioned whose wife had cancer and who volunteered to go to Edmonton, was he qualified to carry on the work that your wife was doing?

Cpl Martin Macumber: Yes, sir, he was fully qualified. He's done several tours overseas with a NATO commitment and UN commitments. He was more than qualified to go down there. But because Heather had not done her field time, she was unable to go, although she did have 16 years with the militia as well as the primary reserves, which is most of the time in the field. So I'm not sure why they can't.... I guess they don't consider that as field time, even though we are supposed to be under the total force concept.

Mr. Leon Benoit: You said you went up and down the ranks to try to resolve this problem. Did you get any explanation as to why no one would really change this, deal with it?

Cpl Martin Macumber: Pretty much everyone I talked to was very sympathetic and they tried their best, but the general tone was this is the way the service is: when you sign the dotted line you are aware that these situations can happen, and if they do happen, you have to deal with it.

The main reason, from what I understand, is it's their policy that the supply technicians and all the CSS trades must do some field time. You have some people who spend twenty years on the army side and never see what is considered a “hard posting”, I think is the proper term. Then on the other side of the coin you have the average supply technician who wears blue who spends twenty years on a “soft posting”—Cold Lake or another air force base. Well, I'm not sure Cold Lake is a soft posting or not. But they're trying to mix it up now so that everyone will be doing.... From what I understand, they'll be doing sea time as well. I can hardly wait for that to happen.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Cpl Martin Macumber: Thanks very much.

The Chairman: Now we have his worship Mayor Ray Coates. Mr. Mayor.

Mr. Ray Coates (Mayor of Cold Lake): Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for affording me this opportunity on behalf of the Cold Lake community to address you on our perspective on the social and economic challenges facing the members of the Canadian Forces and to make some recommendations on the quality of life and type of support and compensation that Canada provides to our military personnel and their families.

At the outset, I want to say that our community affirms the presentations you've heard from the military personnel here today. Our council and our community will agree with virtually everything that's been said to you. I want to underline that at the outset.

I will not try to cover all of the ground that's been covered, because I could not do it the justice that the people you've heard so far have done it. Rather, in consultation with Colonel Guidinger and others, I want to talk more about community relationships and things we can do and your committee can help encourage be done to improve quality of life. So rather than try to cover all aspects of this great topic, I'll restrict myself to the experiences we have had as a community, which we believe will be instructive to the committee.

Certainly I want to mention that as a community we do our best to be supportive and to work alongside the leadership on this base—and it is superb leadership on this base—to try to move the yardsticks where we can, be it with the Alberta government or wherever. We are most willing supporters and co-workers.

I feel compelled to comment briefly but forcefully on the matter of wages and benefits for the services provided by our military members. While some minuscule progress has been made, much more is needed. The seven-year freeze on compensation and the manner it was administered is in my view a severe disincentive to morale and to anyone wanting to stay in the forces.

• 1830

In today's healthy economy, technically trained people like those in the military are in great demand. Unless Canada can offer a decent financial incentive to stay in the forces, they will leave, and we can't blame them.

I know you've already heard much on this point and will hear more, so I won't go into detail. Suffice to say that we support immediate decent compensation related to the special nature of the jobs being done. We, as Canadians, have taken advantage of the loyalty of our Canadian Forces members and families for too long. They need to know they are valued. Early and appropriate attention to proper compensation is needed.

Having said that, my main premise is simply that military partnerships with municipal governments and the civilian community can be very successful in helping meet the social and economic needs of Canadian Forces members and their families. I cite the Cold Lake experience as proof of this premise. Over the years our military and civilian communities have formed a number of partnerships for mutual social and economic benefit. I will give you some examples of those just to make the point.

Chief Scott mentioned, I believe, the renowned brass and reed and pipe and drum bands that exist at 4 Wing. In these bands, military and civilian musicians have combined to provide an entertainment and ceremonial service to 4 Wing, the Cold Lake community, the region, the province, and the country. For example, it was the 4 Wing band that entertained the Queen during her visit to Yellowknife a few years back. Also very important is the personal enrichment experienced by all band members as a result of this partnering opportunity.

I would like to mention our joint Canada Day celebration. For a number of years now the military and civilian communities have held a joint Canada Day celebration. Mr. Benoit attended our celebrations last July. I'm sure he'll agree that it is a testimony of our pride in being Canadians and a symbol of importance of Canadian unity when we all join together on the beaches of Cold Lake to celebrate our country's birthday.

Canadian Forces Week and Freedom of the Town Parade: Each year the second week of September is declared Canadian Forces Week in the town of Cold Lake, and on the Saturday of that week the wing commander parades his troops in our downtown and is granted the traditional freedom of the town as a gesture of respect, thanks, and trust in the military. A community reception follows. This is another successful partnership.

I cannot go on without mentioning Target Top Gun. In 1996 the community was asked by 4 Wing to assist in marketing the positive quality of life aspects of our community as part of Canada's bid to train NATO pilots. The community pulled together as never before to present its eagerness and ability to be a good home for the NATO flight training in Canada program, which has since been achieved and will commence, we understand, in the year 2000. This is another successful partnership. The current chair of the Target Top Gun organization is here watching the proceedings today, Mrs. Hansa Thaleshvar. Hansa, could you give us a wave there? She heads that part. Also present here today is town councillor Fran Jordan, who works on that committee and is one of our supporters of 4 Wing and the quality of life issues in our community.

More and more military personnel are choosing to retire in our community. They have skills to fill many civilian jobs that are now available and they provide a continuing and increasing population in support of the military. This is of great help in ensuring that our military families know that they are always welcome in our community.

On October 1, 1996, the separate entities of 4 Wing, Cold Lake, the town of Grand Centre and the town of Cold Lake were, by order in council of the Government of Alberta, united as the new town of Cold Lake. That move, which brought our local government structure up to speed with the way our communities were living our lives for years, has produced the following excellent results in just over one year.

Firstly, a representative of the wing commander, currently Lieutenant-Colonel Fash, sits as a non-voting member of our town council. Inasmuch as many of many of the decisions council makes have implications for the military, having the advice of a senior military officer at our table is very valuable in ensuring that council's decisions take account of the needs of the military community.

We have a common library board now, and our libraries have been combined under this one board to provide better service to the whole community.

Various sports associations, such as minor hockey and curling, have combined to provide better recreational opportunities. In the case of curling, when the facility on this base had to be closed down because of its antiquity, members joined the downtown club. Already they are planning the construction of a new community curling facility. This is great synergy that's now occurring. This is only possible because of military-civilian partnering efforts, and everyone benefits in the end.

• 1835

The town of Cold Lake now provides some services to the base as a result of the base being within our boundaries. I might get heckled a bit on this, about road maintenance, but because 4 Wing is now within the boundaries of Cold Lake, the town now provides road maintenance services to the same level as in the rest of the town. This service was formerly a direct DND expense. Part of our amalgamation was to agree to offer to 4 Wing, as a result of the amalgamation—it was a requirement, actually—the same services to the same levels as we offer in the rest of the community. We continue to work on that. Yes, we know we've got some improvements to do on those kinds of things. But before that those were entirely DND expenses, so you were paying twice for it.

The town has continued to ensure through a recreation grant that 4 Wing receive the same grant structure to help provide recreational programs in 4 Wing.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention our now all-season marina and winter sports facility. 4 Wing is now part of the community and has a say in the operation of the facility and in the share of its benefits. So we have a beautiful marina in the summer, and we now have it open as a winter sports activity. And because they are now citizens of the town, military members get equal say to any other citizen.

Imperial Park, this huge outdoor recreation area made possible by a generous donation of a half section of land by Imperial Oil Resources Limited, is being designed and built with the needs and support of 4 Wing as well as the civilian community in mind. 4 Wing residents now have a say in this development and will benefit from it.

I should talk about shopping options. Because of our amalgamation, Cold Lake is soon to become Alberta's newest city. One of the spin-offs of this has been the earlier completion of the second phase of the tri-city shopping mall as well as increased shopping opportunities in our downtown, all to the benefit of the entire community.

Finally, I would like to talk about community registration day, which was held on September 6, 1997. I don't think I've ever been more proud of our newly amalgamated community than on this day, when 96 community organizations set up displays in the downtown arena to register participants for the upcoming season. Approximately 2,000 people participated. But what is most significant is that all members of the community, military or non-military, resident of 4 Wing or not, were equally eligible to register in the activities of their choice. Because of partnering, everyone had an opportunity to improve their quality of life.

The most tangible result of partnering for the socio-economic improvement of both the military and civilian parts of our community has been the opportunity created by our amalgamation to participate in the DND military personnel support program in the design, construction, and operation of the much-needed new recreation centre to be constructed here at 4 Wing starting this year. By combining community resources with military resources on the swimming pool portion we will have a superior facility accessible by the entire community and at an equal cost.

I'm sure Colonel Guidinger has already given you a thorough briefing on this project. I'll only add one suggestion for your consideration, and that is that our experience has been, in this project and in some others, that creative and beneficial partnerships like those I have mentioned, and which our governments now encourage, can sometimes be discouraged by prevailing regulations and policies of government that do not anticipate innovation.

I ask your assistance in encouraging the bureaucracies with which we must work to take the view of “How can we make this work?”, as opposed to “This can't work because...” when considering partnering innovations and partnerships that can benefit the military community.

I could go on with many more examples, and I will probably be castigated by some proud members of my community because I didn't include more of them in my remarks. But the examples mentioned clearly make the case for my original premise that military partnerships with municipal governments and the civilian community can be very successful in helping meet the social and economic needs of Canadian Forces members and their families.

• 1840

I thank you for your attention, and I trust that some of the beneficial military and civilian partnerships that I have cited will encourage policies that can improve the quality of life not only in Cold Lake but across Canada as well. Good luck with your endeavours. We look forward to your report and its early implementation. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor.

I would now ask Master Corporal Cynthia Gelsinger to please make her presentation.

Master Corporal Cynthia Gelsinger (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, committee members, ladies and gentlemen, I feel for the corporal who was just up. I'm talking about military service couples as well. It's a sore subject for me.

I'm have been posted away from my spouse now for 16 months. This isn't the first time. We were in Winnipeg 16 months ago. When my spouse was posted to Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, it was under the stipulation that I was to follow in the next APF. In the meantime, I was encountering problems with my children—I should say “our” children; I'm getting used to “my”.

We have a nine-year-old son and a five-year-old daughter. My husband and I brought this to the attention of his superiors. We had documentation from our son's principal, teacher, and school counsellor. Our children are not the types of kids who can go without both parents. Nothing came out of it except a lot of frustration and headaches on both of our parts.

Then I received news that I was being posted to Cold Lake. I was considering putting my release in, but I asked myself, why should I, as I only had just over three years left in my contract.

When I arrived last summer I gave myself a couple of months to settle in and then I proceeded at this end to try to get my family reunited again, it didn't matter where. It will finally be a total of seventeen months apart and approximately three year's damage to my son's mental state. The only reason we're going to be together is because of a redress of grievance that my husband submitted as soon as he got to Moose Jaw dealing with a totally different issue. He was told that if he won he would be posted. I'm very happy that it's coming, but I'm not happy that they wouldn't take our family condition on its own merit.

I thought this was supposed to be part of the new quality of life. The only thing I see for quality of life in here is that more material things are being given or done for personnel. I don't appreciate hearing “Get out if you don't like it”. Is this the new FRP for married service couples? This base has a resource for spouses of spouses away, but I'm in the grey area. Spouses of spouses away only deals with spouses on TD or courses, not on a long-term basis.

I have also inquired regarding this for stress relief. I had the option of joining them or nothing. I was also asked to start a club for spouses who are posted away from each other, like myself. I feel I shouldn't have to go to that extent, especially when there are resources that could be altered for people in my circumstances.

This is becoming a greater issue all the time. Is this the sign of the times? Are we not to get involved with each other and try to raise a family?

Thank you.

• 1845

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: To the best of your knowledge, is it the policy of the forces that has allowed this situation to carry on, or is it choices made by superiors?

MCpl Cynthia Gelsinger: It was not our control; it was choices made by a superior. The bottom line was if you don't like it, get out. The rumour around not only this base, but other bases, is it's the new force reduction plan for married service couples.

My husband has been in Moose Jaw, as I said, since September 1996. He's finally getting here next month. Half the base in Moose Jaw are of service spouses apart from each other. It's becoming a more common thing all the time, and nothing is being done about it.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I guess I'll have to try to get a definitive answer from someone in the forces as to whether it's policy that does prohibit this, or whether it is choices. I guess what I'm getting at is whether there are options to get around policy. If it is policy, it's got to be changed.

I mean, the Minister of Defence stands up and says “We are going to increase the number of females in the military”. How on earth could that ever happen as long as families are treated like this? It just isn't going to happen.

MCpl Cynthia Gelsinger: We're supposed to accept it and put up with it.

The Chairman: Mr. Hanger.

Mr. Art Hanger: When a posting occurs, who makes the decision to do that?

MCpl Cynthia Gelsinger: Out of the 17 years I've been in so far and the 25 years that my husband's been in, I have followed him. He's senior rank and has more time in. So his career manager makes the decision. They look to see if the person is married. Then his career manager would go to my career manager and see if there's a possible posting to post us together.

When he got posted to Moose Jaw it was under the verbal agreement to my husband by his career manager that I would follow the next APF. Since then there has been a change, because Moose Jaw is apparently being downsized. So all of a sudden the agreement is off, and we're to fend on our own.

Mr. Art Hanger: Who makes the decision though for a posting, the final say?

MCpl Cynthia Gelsinger: The career manager, and then I have the choice to accept it or not. If I accept it I go. If I don't accept it, they can make my life miserable and the bottom line is I'd probably end up getting out.

Mr. Art Hanger: So you would appeal to him over your situation and the career manager's response was “If you don't like it get out”—about as blunt as that?

MCpl Cynthia Gelsinger: No, they go around and about in words; they won't put it in black and white either.

Mr. Art Hanger: What recourse do you have if the career manager refuses to listen to your appeal?

MCpl Cynthia Gelsinger: We have the chain of command to go through, right up to the base commander. In our circumstances, we were very fortunate that my husband won his redress of grievance, because if he didn't—and as I said, it dealt with a totally different topic—we'd still be apart to this day. I believe that. Because they had told him that if he didn't win it, he wouldn't be posted; if he won it, he'd be here.

When I first got here this summer, he could have been already here, out of trade, but they didn't want to put him out of trade. Wing Tel would have employed him for two years out of trade.

Mr. Art Hanger: So in this last situation, whom did you appeal to?

MCpl Cynthia Gelsinger: I gave myself a couple of months to settle in, and we have monthly coffee meetings at the junior ranks mess here on base. Chief Warrant Officer Scott heads them. It was an open forum. That's when I stepped in. I went and saw him afterwards and then the ball started from there. I talked to him about my position, I talked to Wing Tel, Major Mulders.

• 1850

Also, at one point the chief warrant officer at 1 AMS got involved, because that's where his trade is most likely employed. The three of them talked to each other. They were talking to the career managers as well. They told me that he was coming.

They took our family situation and combined it with the redress of grievance he had. If he won the redress, well, our family situation would be resolved. Even though he's coming, my family situation is not going to be resolved, because of the mental loss of my children.

Mr. Art Hanger: What you just described to me sounds like a frustrating process to go through. I don't know, maybe the commander can explain more about some alternatives here, but it seems like there's no definitive line of appeal apart from coffee groups.

MCpl Cynthia Gelsinger: My husband at one point went to his member of Parliament in Moose Jaw. It went to administrative inquiry as well. Also, his redress of grievance went up that high as well. So when it got up that high for an inquiry they were looking at it, but still the outcome was if he won the redress of grievance. They did not take our family situation.... As you heard from the corporal before, our family situations are not important.

Mr. Art Hanger: It's a very unhealthy situation, an extremely unhealthy situation.

MCpl Cynthia Gelsinger: There's no stress relief for us in the position we're in.

Mr. Art Hanger: Yes. Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Mr. Pratt.

Mr. David Pratt: Mr. Chair, just as a point of information, I was provided just a few minutes ago with some data on the situation as it currently exists. For the benefit of committee members, I'd like to read it into the record. It's very short. It says that about 7% of CF personnel are married to another service member: 719 officers—that's 5.4% of officers—and 3,438 non-commissioned members—that's 7.1% of NCMs. Sixty-five percent of the service couples have dependants, which raises some challenging child care concerns, particularly when one or both members are in operational units. CF career managers do their best to post service couples together. However, in some situations operational requirements and career development needs take priority. Over the past few years the CF has co-located between 88% and 92% of couples. Currently, 90% of service couples are co-located.

So if you do the math on that, with approximately 4,157 total in terms of service members that are married and with 10% of couples that haven't been co-located, you're looking at probably over 400 couples at this point.

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit, you had a follow-up question.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes. Would you accept that a family would be split if one member of the couple is going on a tour of duty overseas?

MCpl Cynthia Gelsinger: I also have endured my husband gone on a UN tour. We've been separated for the six months on the UN tour. I have no problem with that. That's part of our life, our duty, our career.

I also encountered eight months separation on a previous posting. He got posted to Winnipeg eight months before I did, and I was back in our previous posting, which was Edmonton, Alberta, at that time. We left Winnipeg separated. Now it's 17 months, and there are a lot of expenses the military does not cover while family people are apart.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Master Warrant Officer Ron Kinsman, please.

Master Warrant Officer Ron Kinsman (Individual Presentation): Good afternoon.

• 1855

Some of the topics I will be covering this evening have already been touched on by the good chief, but personnel at my squadron wanted to have them aired so I'm here to air them.

The first one is uncertainty and constant changes. While it is understood that change is necessary to retain a healthy, viable organization, changes must come organized and be well thought out as to the short- and long-term effects on the military member. Personnel must be given the opportunity to adapt to the change, recognize the pros and cons, plan for the adoption in the workplace, and be given an avenue to express the need to alter the change if needed to better suit its application to their environment.

There have been so many enormous changes in the past few years—i.e., personnel reduction, terms of service, trade restructuring, and amalgamation of trades—that the military members have lost sight of where they were, where they are going, how they're going to get there, and the reasoning behind the change. They feel betrayed and have the steadfast opinion that they're being used as a sacrificial lamb by the government and the military hierarchy to justify to the civilian populace that we can be refined to a state of complete and utter uselessness.

Self realization. There are virtually no promotional rewards left for the military member. They all very well know that with the glut that exists in the trades and the ranks, along with the downsizing throughout the rank structure, all their efforts to excel at the job they're doing will only result in some fancy words on an evaluation form. All that is left to them is their pride in the work they are doing, and even this pride is quickly waning. It is getting virtually impossible for supervisors to keep their personnel motivated knowing that all that can be promised is that if they remain in the military long enough there could some day be advancement and an opportunity to better provide for their families.

Pay. The military pay system should not be tied to any other organizational pay scheme. The military members are unique in what they do, what can be required, and what is expected of them. They are the primary means available to defend the democracy of this great country. At any time they can be called upon to make the ultimate sacrifice, regardless of the consequences to their families. All the past pay incentives, raise adjustments, or whatever politically correct term is used to code these minuscule increases, have resulted in no improvement in the lifestyle of the members. These so-called increases have also been accompanied by increases in taxes, CPP, UIC, supplementary death benefits, military pension plan payments, and PMQ rent, a culmination of which resulted in the member actually seeing a very small pay increase. These increases look good on paper and in the tabloids but do not materialize where they're needed the most: in the bank account.

Presently, any thought of further increases is once again frozen until the government settles the dispute with the civil service concerning pay equity for all of its members dating back to 1983. The military member has been told that the government will only allow a certain amount of money to the military budget and that if further pay increases are to come they will be at the expense of future planned military programs. If this cannot occur, is there going to be another forces reduction to the area of 48,000 personnel?

The military places incredible demands upon its personnel, demands that are unique and not experienced by civilian industry. They have answered every call to the best of their ability and they deserve a substantial raise now, one that will allow them to provide comfortably for the well-being of the family.

Isolated postings. A posting to Cold Lake does not enrich the lives of all military personnel. The personnel whose spouses are in the civilian workforce have a distinct disadvantage. First, the spouse has to terminate their employment and give up all the advances they have made in the workforce to once again start all over, and that is if they are lucky enough to get employment in the same field they have just left.

Many spouses cannot find employment. If they do, it is at a far less rate of pay and not in the same field for which they have spent years training or establishing expertise. This in turn has a severe impact on the family unit, as they are now in an area with greater cost of living expenses with a reduced disposable income. Spouses today play a major part in the military family's well being, and their influence, positive or negative, has a major impact on the pressures experienced by the military member. These negative pressures have been so strong that marital break-ups are a result.

Second, they are exposed to an area where there are greatly reduced amenities, such as shopping and medical expertise, thus requiring travelling substantial distances to satisfy family and medical needs. The post-secondary wants of dependants mean the dependants will need travel and boarding facilities that will substantially increase the cost to the family for the dependant's education.

• 1900

Fourth, any member who has dependants in competitive sports has to spend a substantial amount of funds for the transportation needed to drive these children to games or competitions.

Any member who is posted to an area of decreased amenities or lesser employment opportunities for spouses or increased living expenses should be given an allowance that will assist members to meet the additional financial burdens that are thrust upon them.

Family visitation. All military personnel should be given the opportunity to utilize military charter flights or have the current charter airlines offer substantially discounted domestic fares, which would allow the member to visit their families once every three years. Military personnel here at Cold Lake are from all areas of Canada and do not have the financial means to visit their families and will not be able to do so unless they are posted to a base in proximity to their family. The senior supervisors of the military are not the only ones who are responsible for the well-being of the personnel; the government has a vested interest also.

Surveys and lack of trust. Military members are tired of filling out surveys and not seeing any of the concerns addressed. They no longer believe the concerns are of interest to the government and are of the opinion that they are looked on as second-class citizens. The opinion and the fact gathering and briefings are just another exercise devised to hear what our wants are and then have them not actioned because of the well-known bureaucratic red tape that is so prevalent in the government.

They do not believe their well-being is going to be taken into consideration in all the plans that are being formulated to entice pilots to stay in the military. Further, it really doesn't matter how good any pilot is. If the aircraft is not serviceable, it can't be flown. It may be advantageous to the government to revisit its thinking in the matter and ensure there are well-trained, paid, and motivated technicians around to keep the elite in the air.

The final opinion they all wanted to be put forward is that it appears the government doesn't value the most valuable military asset, and that's its personnel.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

I now call on Master Corporal Mike Brown.

Master Corporal Mike Brown (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, in particular the members from Alberta, Mr. Coates, and Colonel Guidinger, I would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you this afternoon.

These are the health-related issues in the area. These concerns were brought to light when my daughter Maryanne was taken to the Cold Lake hospital for her medical treatment.

On May 10, 1997, Maryanne severed an artery on a piece of broken glass and was taken to Cold Lake Regional Hospital, where Dr. Ezeji-Okoye attended to her. The short form is “Dr. OB”. After trying unsuccessfully for approximately one hour to stop the bleeding, and considering the injury to be life-threatening, Dr. OB placed a call to Stars air ambulance to medevac Maryanne to Edmonton immediately. The immediate response from Stars was that the air ambulance would not be available for approximately five hours.

At the time I requested that a call be made to the Canadian forces base at Cold Lake to use their helicopter for an air evac, a practice that is considered highly acceptable by base personnel. The hospital staff at the Cold Lake Regional Hospital refused to phone the base, stating that it was policy not to use the base for air evac. Dr. Ezeji-Okoye then made the decision to transport Maryanne by ambulance to Edmonton.

In this matter, these are my concerns. When it became evident Stars was not available, the base should have been contacted and the attending physician should have used the facility at Bonnyville, where a surgeon was on duty at that time. As a result of this decision to send my daughter to Edmonton by ambulance, I have since received a bill for the sum of $2,059.26 to pay for services over which I had no control.

As I believe in looking after my family, I subscribe to the public service health care plan, which is known as PSHCP. I am also a paying member of Alberta Health Care. In this regard the system has put me at a disadvantage, and it raises concerns in two areas.

• 1905

The first area is that the inter-hospital emergency patient transfer program that is currently enforced by the regional health authority has a policy that, with one exception, will pay for the cost of the hospital-to-hospital transfer that was ordered by the doctor. That exception is a person having private insurance. As my PSHCP paid only 80% of the cost, this left me with a balance of $459.85 owing. Because of my private coverage, which every member of the Canadian Forces has—I would like to add that, sir—the regional authority refused to cover the remaining balance regardless of its meeting all the other criteria of the program.

Second, the policies currently in place in the province of Alberta encourage people like myself to be a drain on the system rather than to help the system cut costs by using private insurance. Specifically, if I had no insurance, I would not have incurred the $459.85 charge, because the regional health authority would have felt it their obligation to pick up $2,059.26. If Stars had been made available, I would not have incurred a $459.85 charge, since the entire amount would have been picked up by Alberta Health Care.

From a dependant health care perspective, 4 Wing Cold Lake is classed as an isolated medical unit, to which a large number of personnel come with their families because they were given no option other than release from the Canadian Forces. On my arrival here in the 1990-91 timeframe, dependant health care in the area was considered good. However, over the past seven years I have personally watched family health care slowly degrade to a point where it has affected me and my family personally on more than this one occasion. As the Department of National Defence and 4 Wing have taken an aggressive position in promoting quality of life issues, it is essential that something as important as health care be the number one priority, and that this health care be of the highest quality.

Mr. Chairman, I earnestly solicit your support in convincing the Alberta regional health authorities to work with private insurance companies on insurance coverage by covering the remaining 20% rather than penalizing its users. I seek your committee's recommendation in restoring the health care system in the Cold Lake area to something comparable to, if not better than, those services available before 1991. I also ask for your help in directing DND to put in place a compensatory package that will defray all dependant health care-related expenses incurred as a result of people being posted to Cold Lake.

Thank you very much.

The Chairman: We have received a copy of your brief and we will be looking at it when we get back to Ottawa. Thank you.

Mr. Art Hanger: Master Corporal, would you have been able to contact the base yourself?

MCpl Mike Brown: It was an emergency situation, sir. There was no real time to contact the base. She was thrown into an ambulance and it was literally lights and sirens all the way to the city.

Mr. Art Hanger: That decision was made right there.

MCpl Mike Brown: That decision was made by the doctor, sir, to do a hospital-to-hospital transfer. I was going to put her in my own vehicle and go.

Mr. Art Hanger: Yes, understood.

The base would have no objection to making such an evacuation, I gather.

MCpl Mike Brown: Absolutely none.

Mr. Art Hanger: Now, what was the basis for the hospital not wanting to call for any available means of transport? Is that actually a policy?

MCpl Mike Brown: I had a quote from the hospital, sir, from the doctor, that it was not policy. I have taken this issue by many different avenues to the regional health authority and to the hospital administration themselves. As a matter of fact, it has gone to the Minister of Health.

• 1910

Mr. Art Hanger: Good.

MCpl Mike Brown: I'm hitting dead ends. Nobody wants to help me anywhere. That's the basic problem.

On that issue alone, they just said point-blank, it's policy. If you ask anybody what the policy is...nobody can tell me what the policy is.

The wing commander is well aware of my situation. He knows that was the answer I was given.

I've been here since 1990-91, sir. That's not the policy.

Mr. Art Hanger: Yes, because such situations have occurred in the past and there has been reasonable communication between base and hospital.

MCpl Mike Brown: Yes, sir.

Mr. Art Hanger: If I may ask, have you defined it as a local situation, as far as the directive is concerned; just locally to that hospital? Or is it the Department of Health?

MCpl Mike Brown: The whole issue I'm trying to raise here, sir, is I am in an isolated medical unit—

Mr. Art Hanger: You bet.

MCpl Mike Brown: —and I am expected to pay costs I would not incur were I anywhere else in Canada not so classed. I can get posted to Yellowknife and get better medical treatment there than I can here. That's pretty bad.

Mr. Art Hanger: I appreciate that, Master Corporal. But I'm still not quite clear whether it's just a local thing that can be resolved with the hospital itself or it's actually an issue for the Department of Health and the province.

MCpl Mike Brown: This is an issue for the Department of Health within the province, sir, because it is their policy that dictates that I have to pay out the extra money even while I pay Alberta Health Care and I also pay PSHCP.

Mr. Art Hanger: So there are two basic things, that payment and the communications side.

MCpl Mike Brown: Yes, sir.

Mr. David Price: Had you had a doctor on base and you had gone on the base you would have been evacuated from here.

MCpl Mike Brown: Yes, sir.

The Chairman: Master Corporal, how is your daughter now?

MCpl Mike Brown: She's quite fine. She cut herself again. Because of the lack of medical facilities within the Cold Lake area here, I had to drive her to Bonnyville.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Master Warrant Officer Bill Atkinson.

Master Warrant Officer Bill Atkinson (Individual Presentation): I'm from 416 Squadron. After listening to all these issues, I have a couple of points besides what I actually want to talk about.

First of all, I'm very proud of the people I work with, very proud of the job they've done in Aviano. I'm also proud of the hundred people who stayed back here and supported the spouses.

I want to say one thing. Are you people aware you do not provide any funding whatsoever for spouses when they are away? We generated that funding out of non-public funds. We generated that funding to try to offer opportunities for the spouses to get together and to encourage them. We do have a SOSA policy, which helps some, but there is a need to make sure those families feel as if they are part of the whole squadron. There's no public interest in the spouses, or at least so it appears. I just wanted to make that comment.

The other one is I had the opportunity to do the chief warrant officer's job for five months. I have to admit it has opened my eyes immensely. I'm absolutely convinced you do not pay them enough. Sir, if you consider where a chief warrant officer sits.... He sits at the wing commander's table. He sits at the CO's table. He sits at your general's table. He represents us in Ottawa. Yet we pay them less than we pay the majors who sit right beside them in the room. If you gave them pay equity with just our majors, you could broaden that pay field for NCMs enough to offer incentives.

• 1915

I'm sorry about that. I had to get that off my chest.

I have another issue that's dear to my heart as well, since in the last 13 months it's been $425 out of my own pocket. That's eye wear. The military currently only funds—at least that I'm aware of—basic frames and basic eyeglasses. If you want progressive lenses rather than bifocals so you can see comfortably when you work at a computer or on some technical task, you must pay out of your own pocket to the tune of $80 a pair. If you want to have an anti-glare coating so that you can comfortably drive at night, it's $35 a pair.

In the last year, because my prescription has changed twice, I have had to buy six pairs of glasses. Where's my medical system? What am I paying...? I'm supposed to have medical coverage. So are the rest of the people in this room, sir. But it sure doesn't sound like it. It sounds like we're treated as second class.... We seem to be locked in 1965 when we probably first brought out glasses, for crying out loud. We haven't been progressive. We haven't kept up with the technology out there.

When you look through this pair of glasses...it's as if I had no glasses on. If I wear the standard issue stuff, I get reflections; it's hard to look at computer screens. If I'm looking through bifocals then I have that line in the middle.

I'm not asking for anything extravagant. All I'm asking for is that the things I need to work comfortably in the workplace be provided for me. I shouldn't have to pay out of my own pocket for that.

Anyway, thanks for your time.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Padre Kelly Bokovay.

Padre Kelly Bokovay (Individual Presentation): Good afternoon. I'm one of the five chaplains stationed here at Cold Lake.

There are many intangible and less visible things that enhance the quality of life for our members here, and our families, as there are on every other base. Along with the other helping professionals who work here, very much behind the scenes helping people, my colleagues and I help people cope with the challenges of life in general and with the challenges of service life in particular. I'm glad to be part of such a gifted group of care givers. Chaplaincy, social work, and counselling for addictions and other types of problems are crucial to the air force so that it can operate functionally and be ready.

I'm not going to talk about chapels today, but the fact that we have two thriving chapel congregations within our community here is really often taken for granted. Should those entities cease to exist for any reason, the wider community would be diminished, I believe irreparably, notwithstanding the existence of civilian churches in the area.

But there is one instance in the life of a service family where even the very best counselling and spiritual care will not necessarily be effective. Chief Scott has already covered this briefly in his presentation. That instance is when there is a death or a life-threatening illness in a member's immediate family or that of his or her spouse. Attending that funeral or being at that bedside can be crucial in ensuring the long-term spiritual and psychological recovery from that critical event. If they're not there, sometimes those people are not going to be effective on the job. In the 20 years I've been in the service, first as an army officer and now as a chaplain, I have yet to feel that we properly attend to our people adequately in those circumstances.

There has always been provision for allowing members and spouses and, I might add, only pre-school-aged children, to travel in compassionate cases on service air flights, but only as space is available. Even when we were flying our own passenger aircraft—and the numbers of aircraft in our fleets have been radically reduced since then—getting a person to a funeral or a bedside was difficult and tenuous. With the advent of airline charter use, the situation has not changed. Those who book non-duty travel, let's say to go visit relatives, are now confirmed in their seats 48 hours before the plane flies. For most of our compassionate cases we are working well within that 48-hour window after the seats have already been filled up.

• 1920

I guess the point here is that grieving and anxious service families really are at the bottom of the pecking order.

It's interesting to note that there's always money to repatriate a member from an out-of-Canada posting or a tour of duty in a compassionate circumstance. I think we do that very well. But for many people it begs the question as to whether or not this is in part simply because of the increased press activity and public interest in an overseas operational theatre. Are we saying that a corporal in Cold Lake who loses a loved one is less susceptible to grief than a corporal serving in Haiti or Bosnia? I think not.

This is a huge country, and that point has already been made today. Domestic air travel is very expensive, especially when you're on a fixed military income trying to raise a family. The cost of a flight, even with an airline compassionate discount, is simply and clearly out of reach for many of our families at the low end of the pay scale. Some commanders have done some very creative things in order to get their people home in those situations: using Canadian Forces aircraft, booking unscheduled temporary duty trips, using unit canteen funds to pay for travel, and even passing the hat around the hanger so that somebody can get home.

Our leaders—and this is a point I want to make very clear—are now being forced into situations of bending rules because of the compassion they have for their troops. This ethical dilemma for the leader is completely unfair.

Furthermore, what we've created now are huge inequities, because some members are located on bases where no aircraft are stationed or where commanding officers simply refuse to be creative. They found Smith a way home to his father's funeral, but not poor old Jones.

We can do better. We must do better.

As has already been said here today, service families do not choose to live thousands of kilometres away from home, if I can use that term, though they do appreciate that postings are a part of service life. However, they are disgusted at being continually compared with the public service in matters of pay and benefits.

Most public servants do not have an unlimited liability contract with their country, as the people in uniform in this room do. Many of them are prepared—I believe all of them are—to sacrifice their lives and their limbs to accomplish their missions. Many of them have. Many of them have done that very recently. So to say that service families cannot have a comprehensive compassionate travel policy because the public service does not have one is to completely misunderstand the unique nature of the military. So I would implore you, in your recommendations, to stop comparing apples and oranges.

Unless we are at war, I would suggest that it is reasonable for the nation to guarantee a service member and his or her spouse, and even their children, access to comprehensive compassionate travel. Does it cost money? Oh yes. Does it cost a huge amount of money? No, I do not believe so.

• 1925

As a leader before and as a chaplain now, I am very weary of telling people there is no way for them to get home to that death bed or that funeral. My colleagues and I have been taking much of the heat for others. We've been taking much of the anger from those people, because we deal with them face to face. Yet because we work behind the scenes, the policy makers don't see it. Our commanders are stressed from the pressure to find these creative ways to help their people who are in crisis. I believe if the policy makers and senior leaders were to look into the eyes of the people who are most affected by the current policy, they might change their minds and put compassionate travel for service people much higher on their priority list.

I can tell you from my experience that when a member is denied the ability to get home in compassionate circumstances because of low pay, geographical distance, and service flights that are filled with non-duty travellers, we have lost some of their loyalty. Something of their drive to serve dies within them at that point. Oh, they will come to work. They will do their job. They will carry on. But don't be so sure they will have the resolve to continue to make those huge sacrifices for their country if their country refuses to make just a few for them.

To my mind the tragedy is that the cost-effective solutions to this problem do exist. The problem has been identified time and time again. In the atmosphere of financial constraint, commanders and chaplains alike unfortunately have almost given up the fight for better compassionate travel.

I simply say today, with no malice, shame on the leaders and policy makers who have not listened to this problem in the past. Shame on those who choose to do nothing about it now. Depending on the time of year and flight availability, a 60% to 80% success rate at securing a flight for someone in that kind of crisis is simply not good enough. Why can't everybody be included, whether they serve overseas or in this large country of Canada?

I urge you to fix the problem. The benefit Canadians will derive in blood and sweat and effort from their servicemen and servicewomen will continue unabated if you heed. I'm not so sure about that if some of the things we've been talking about today are not addressed.

Thank you for your time.

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Padre, you have said this issue has been brought up before several times. I would like you to elaborate a little on that.

Padre Kelly Bokovay: Before I came here I served on an army base. At that time Land Force Command did a study on compassionate travel; how it was working and how it wasn't working. It didn't get past LFC headquarters. Air Command, when it existed, now 1 Canadian Air Division, has also done a study within the last year on how effective our compassionate travel is. All that information, once it gets collated, seems to sit in places where decisions are not being made.

I think part of the problem that has been identified is that with the downsizing in the forces, some of the people whose job it would have been 10 or 15 years ago to spend time and energy solving those problems simply don't exist. That may be part of the reason why those problems are not being addressed.

I think the other part of the reason those problems are not addressed at NDHQ level, quite frankly, is that most of the people dealing with those issues have plastic in their wallets. When they have a personal family problem they can buy an airline ticket. Most of the folks in this room can't afford to do that.

• 1930

Mr. Art Hanger: Padre, at the beginning of your presentation you talked of chaplaincy, you talked of counselling as a crucial, invaluable entity in the military environment. I agree. You also said “should this entity cease to exist”. Is there some threat to the position of chaplaincy in the military?

Padre Kelly Bokovay: We've taken our own share of hits, as everybody else has, over the last five to six years, and even beyond that.

When you start talking about alternate service delivery, we're easy targets. It almost happened with our social workers last year, forces-wide. We're easy targets, but because we're invisible, sometimes we don't get prominence in terms of what we actually input into the operational capacity of an installation such as 4 Wing.

We've downsized. Now we have about 135 chaplains in the armed forces in the regular force. What we're finding now in places such as Edmonton is that it is not just the people around here that are starting to burn out. It's the chaplains that are burning out and the social workers that are burning out because their caseloads are so heavy. We've been sort of closing chapel buildings across the country. We've been closing bases. If we can't provide the kind of social care network for our people that they need to function in the unique roles that they're playing, the system is going to implode.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I have a short follow-up question.

You said that the people who used to do the job of ensuring that compassionate flights are accommodated are no longer there. Who used to do that?

Padre Kelly Bokovay: No, that's not what I meant. What I meant was that the issue from the coal face has been raised many times over the years and sent up to headquarters, to say, how can we solve this problem? The problem is that now there aren't sufficient people in those headquarters to deal with solving the problems at the levels that they need to be solved at, which is Land Force headquarters or Canadian Air Division and NDHQ. The staff simply doesn't exist.

But I don't believe that's the only problem. I believe there's been a shift of emphasis in the forces in terms of senior leadership being very focused on cutting dollars and saving money. In order to do that effectively and still do your job as a field commander or as a wing commander or at the sharp end, people have to take time and energy away from something, in order not only to perform their operational role but also to start being fiscal managers in a way that they never had to do before.

Where does that come from?

When I get really busy, the first thing that goes out of my schedule is my physical fitness.

What has happened is the thing that has gone out of the schedule of our senior leadership, not because of their choosing, is looking after their people. You've heard that today already.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Master Corporal Mark Horsman, please.

A voice: He's not here.

The Chairman: Padre Todd Meaker.

Padre Todd Meaker (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chair, members of the committee, Colonel Guidinger, everyone gathered here, my name is Padre Todd Meaker. I will be very brief, with two prefatory remarks.

One is I think my wife's locked out at home, so I have to go quickly. She finished at 5 p.m. and I have both the keys for the house, so I promise not to take too much of your time.

The other one is I certainly have appreciated, in my observing, on the lighter side of things, your listening skills. You're welcome at any time to any of my sermons. I'm very impressed.

• 1935

I have only two points on one topic that I want to touch on, and that topic is deployment issues. I think the committee—and I encountered a number of you in Aviano—covered well the hearing of issues service members face in theatre, in deployment. I will commend their memory to you and for brevity focus on just these two points.

The first would be to speak to the whole issue of our deployment from the perspective of dependants, how it impacts on them. I think MWO Atkinson mentioned that they're an invisible asset in the military community. They're also major players in the operational life of the armed forces because they hold the fort. They make a sacrifice for Canada that I'm not so sure we dignify in a very tangible or realistic way. That's something I wanted to bring to the committee's attention.

I know financially we probably won't be able to coin a medal. That's too bad. I know there's great creativity among service personnel in taking medals and turning them into brooches and things like that. But that's a light side, a symbolic gesture, on a very important issue. I do carry that to your dialogue.

The second point is the problems we face, particularly within the air force environment, as we're called on in a very substantial way to do augmentation on a number of the NATO and United Nations operations. What I mean by that is that we find significant numbers of our personnel, in a piecemeal way, called out of their workplaces here, say, in Cold Lake to augment taskings of larger configurations where the core group may be coming from another base or command level.

What that means back home is that they tend not to get the full diet, if you will, of pre-, during-, and post-deployment support. That causes serious issues in the care of our personnel, first, in preparing them for the operational realities—not only the service personnel but particularly the family members. They may get left out. Normally this is done by a group called the rear party. While Aviano worked very well because we were the core group, I'm speaking now about individuals who have left their shops in construction engineering, maintenance transportation, a whole variety of different places, and have gone to augment. Their spouses don't get that full rear party activity, simply because it's physically not here. They're often left alone or they're not identified in their needs. That's a significant problem. They also tend not to get a lot of the briefings. We try the best we can. We do lay them on. We have a great program called SOSA, but the saleability of that is difficult when you don't have that larger community of support.

I don't have the particular answer for that right now, but I do know it's an important issue. There is some human suffering quietly happening with families and spouses. It's a good point.

This is also something that I think we've started to notice and identify in the armed forces community at the reserve level. This has been documented. It's a variation on that theme. They go, they come back, they finish their call of contract, and they may fall by the wayside accidentally. I think this is happening with service personnel when they come back, and certainly from the dependants' point of view.

The whole issue of deployment and deployment stress is an important one, but it's merely a part of a lot of the things you've heard today. We have kept a tempo of a 90% workload with a 45% cut in personnel. We hear these kinds of figures speaking to us. The end state of it all, the human factor, is that you have cumulative stress on the service member and the families. That, of course, reduces productivity, morale....

I believe we're putting up a brave front in the military. In the sanctuaries, where I see the masks come off, morale is low, in my opinion.

• 1940

If we stand up in the light of day, we're all still very proud to be part of the armed forces, and proud to be part of the military community here in Cold Lake. That is true, and there is sincerity in that. But I believe there's an exhaustion deeper in the soul of the military psyche, if you will, and that needs to be healed. I suspect things like this are movements towards that. Please do continue that, but know that when we consider it, the dependants also have left an area of becoming invisible, and they serve Canada. I commend that to your attention with my remarks on morale.

Thank you very much. I do have a moment if you have any questions. Then I'll skedaddle home and placate my wife with great apologies.

The Chairman: Mr. Hanger.

Mr. Art Hanger: Padre, I really appreciate you and your colleague appearing here. This has been very beneficial for me.

I wonder how you would handle a situation like this. A young lady with a couple of children, the wife of a military member, has one child with a severe allergy and is living in accommodations that are very difficult to endure and putting significant stress on their marriage. She has to fend for herself a great deal of the time because her husband is out on tour or in training somewhere, which is quite normal for a military environment, with the expectation that things will be better when he gets back; and they are not, and they are at their wits' end. They attempt to cope on a salary that is very low and not sufficient to meet all the medical needs and they have a growing debt because they have to borrow to be able to meet ends temporarily. You must have heard the story. It must have been repeated numerous times. As an advocate, what can you do?

Padre Todd Meaker: There is no global answer to that, sir. What we end up doing when we meet it on an individual-by-individual basis is, as I guess you heard about compassionate flights, we try to partnership with any assets in our community to find creative solutions. Sometimes that happens at the unit level.

I'm constantly amazed by...and I guess this falls on the backs of our people again. I see units going out of their way to help out individuals. They will do driving. I see the units often sacrificing in the workplace to look after their people. Sometimes we try to help in the coordination of that, bringing attention to it if we can, so we can harness assets to get a solution for those individuals.

You've hit on something, sir, that I think is also very important. When we talk about the operational tempos we have, with the personnels and amalgamations we've had impacted on us, that raises the whole thing of, go on and do your deployment. We're all good to go; we're all keen to go. It's the profession of our arms.

Mr. Art Hanger: Sure.

Padre Todd Meaker: It's a good thing.

The problem with the reduction of the numbers is in care staff and helping professionals, as Padre Bokovay said, right across the whole system. We're hampered in doing that. When the man or woman in the armed forces goes on deployment and they get back, we're so short of numbers we say, hi, take your kitbag and unload it for a few days; oh, by the way, you're going to teach this course, or you're going on this course. This is incredible.

A wonderful case.... I guess I'm not allowed to talk about the things I've heard. I wish I could, because they would make us have to lower our eyebrows surgically, we would be so shocked.

I suspect the answer to your question, sir, is simply that we are left to creative means on an individual basis. We don't have the global answer to do that.

Mr. Art Hanger: No. As a group of pastors preaching in the military, you have obviously met together, and there is no question there has been significant discussion about the environment so many of the military personnel live under. I trust there has been significant feedback to DND over these issues as you have compiled them. I'm not saying “you”, but the group of pastors.

• 1945

I'm kind of curious about the response, if any.

Padre Todd Meaker: I think one of the good initiatives under the last CDS, for example, was the whole resurgence of chaplains having the opportunity to act at the wing commander, base commander levels, right up through the command levels, just to report monthly on morale and issues of significant impact in the community.

We've done studies, you're right. We've presented that data with the other helping care professionals. I suspect that's one of the reasons we've reversed the social workers issue. That helped. That is an example of those kinds of dialoguing responses.

I think there have been those studies, but the general fatigue in the military.... We can get people to say, yes, in principle we agree with you, but either we don't have the resources or we don't have the simple energy to attend to this at this time. So when that kind of reporting goes up, that's often, like other issues, the come-back response.

Does that answer your question?

Mr. Art Hanger: It does indeed. Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Padre, and good luck with your wife.

Padre Todd Meaker: I'll be cooking dinner.

A voice: Take her out for dinner.

Padre Todd Meaker: I don't have any money!

Voices: Oh, oh!

The Chairman: Chief Warrant Officer Tony Calderone.

Chief Warrant Officer Tony Calderone (Individual Presentation): Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, Colonel Guidinger, Chief Warrant Officer Scott.

I'm squadron chief warrant officer at 441 Squadron.

There are two issues I'd like to discuss today. Chief Warrant Officer Scott went over them broadly, but I'm here to reiterate them to focus on their importance.

First I'd like to speak about terms of service. In past years all members were told that only their desks would be extended past the 20-year mark. A few years ago a decision was made by our leaders to offer indefinite periods of service to corporals and master corporals. This was a good decision in that they should be allowed to stay to the age 55, as is allowed in the senior ranks. What I don't understand is why we were going to offer three-year continuous engagements to approximately 75% of all eligible personnel who have not met the cut-off for indefinite periods of service. For example, a 514 aviation technician occupation has already stagnated and does not expect any promotions to the rank of master corporal or sergeant until the year 2001. If the occupation is already overloaded from re-engineering and ASD initiatives and now all personnel are kept for three years and over, where are we going in the future? When can our young men and women expect attrition to catch up so that they may progress professionally and financially? This is a question I am asked frequently as a leader, to which I cannot respond.

As you well know, ladies and gentlemen, the only way to get ahead financially in this outfit is through promotion. If we dare to take that away then we have taken away the pride, motivation, and enthusiasm that keeps this organization alive. We would certainly lose our best personnel to better opportunities and end up keeping our worst, which happen to be part of the 75% we offered extensions to.

Secondly I'd like to speak quickly about the difficulties with post-secondary education that our older members endure while posted to 4 Wing in Cold Lake. To put it simply, there is no post-secondary in the area. An additional $7,000 to $10,000 per year is the average cost incurred by a member of 4 Wing when sending a dependant to college or university in Alberta. That cost may rise quickly, depending on the province in which your child attends school.

Most members are unable to plan and control their location as the dependant reaches school age. This results in several stresses, including where to apply, additional money needed, and different admission requirements for different institutions and provinces. This in turn forces many military members to seek release action in the prime earning years of their lives to accommodate their children's education. This is certainly not beneficial to the department, as it loses a valued contributing member because of circumstances beyond its control.

Isolation not only means being posted to CFS Alert, being deployed on UN tours, or even at sea on a NATO cruise. It also means not having the amenities and facilities normally available to any Canadian.

• 1950

I further suggest that if the normal Canadian doesn't have these amenities available, then it's by their own choice; but being told you're posted to Cold Lake with university and college age children may certainly cause undue stress and financial difficulties.

Solutions?

Well, certainly recognition of Cold Lake's isolation status, as it refers to this situation as well as others, such as the medical issues you've heard about here today, would be of great benefit: a compensation package similar to that available to members posted to Europe, where a benefit is paid to the member when a dependant must move away from the primary place of residence to attend post-secondary education.

I believe these changes are required quickly and would certainly reduce the stress already incurred by the 4 Wing military community.

I submit this brief for your scrutiny at a further date.

Thank you. That's all I have.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Sergeant Donald Foss.

Sergeant Donald Foss (Individual Presentation): I'm here to talk about the professional development. It's more related to the working environment. This is going to increase the morale and the pride in our working force, both civilian and military.

This is coming from my point of view as an electrical and mechanical engineer. We keep the vehicle fleet operational in the wing here. Some of the training that we need in the automotive industry is electronic fuel injection courses and a whole bunch of other ones that I have listed here.

What I'm asking for is more money, basically. I want to send my guys on these courses to bring them up to speed in the training. This will allow them to do their job keeping current with the fleet of the vehicles that are coming in now. We are getting in brand-new types of equipment and our training is substandard. So what is happening now is the pride in workmanship is being decreased. So we are trying to get our level of training up to a standard where we can keep current with the civilian industry. Doing this will increase the pride in the condition of our vehicle fleet.

On another side of that, we also would like to increase our personal management skills as far as training our subordinates is concerned. This will increase our ability to manage our staff better, more efficiently and more accurately, and employ them better. In doing that, it's also going to increase the pride and the morale in the troops, and thus increase the quality of life.

In short, I want more money. I'll spend it to train my guys, which will give a better working environment, better vehicle fleets, and better morale all around.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Master Corporal Dennis Gemmell.

Master Corporal Dennis Gemmell (Individual Presentation): I'm also from the electrical and mechanical shop.

My question detours a little bit after that. I'm facing the biggest travel of my life coming this year, into retirement.

With the training Sergeant Foss was just talking about, to make myself saleable downtown we've got a program called SCAN. What the SCAN does is give us the opportunities and the tools with post-education for us to better ourselves.

The problem with being posted here in Cold Lake is that none of the training is here for my trade as a motor vehicle mechanic. If I was posted to any other base in Canada, the colleges and universities would be close. The closest college here that offers the training I require is a four-hour drive south.

When I move to southern Ontario at the end of the year, I will be unsaleable, untrainable, and most likely without a job. It's not a challenge that I'm looking forward to, but it's a challenge I'll overcome and surpass once I get to Ontario and get that training.

It would be nice if the training funds were available here so that personnel that are out of the schedule could go to educational centres to receive that training upon retirement.

The training here in Alberta may not be accepted in Ontario. I can spend the taxpayers' money, take the courses here in Edmonton. They don't mean anything in Ontario, because the province regulates the trades and you've got to take the training in that province.

• 1955

I could retire here. I know the area. I have networking here. But my family is in Ontario, and it's a long decision for me to make that move into something such that I don't know what I'm getting into.

Just as a side point, even on the posting here, my wife has leukemia, Crohn's, and ITP, which means she's allergic to her own blood. I passed the process to come here with flying colours because I was told there were excellent medical facilities here and a beautiful hospital, and the colonel had a plane going daily to Edmonton for med runs. She was hoping she could get sick just to get an F-18 ride. I'm still waiting.

I thank you for your time. I hope after I'm gone these processes will be available to people so it will make their timeframe ending the military a lot more enjoyable and something they will look forward to, rather than, in a lot of cases, a scary application down the road. I would much rather go to Bosnia than retire, but it's coming close.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Master Corporal John Edelman.

Master Corporal John Edelman (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, honourable members of the committee, the issue I would like to address was touched on by Chief Warrant Officer Calderone, and that would be terms of service, but more specifically the three-to-five-year extensions that have been recently approved for basically the 75% of the corporals, master corporals, and sergeants who don't make the grade for the IPS.

First of all, there's one severe problem with this offering of these CEs, and it is that we know absolutely nothing about the long-term plan for them. What I mean is are they going to offer them in future to the people who have already received one, or are they going to offer them to personnel like myself who don't make the cut-off time, or both? I have 15 years in, and what they say is it's guaranteed only for the near future.

This causes an inability for the serviceman to do any career planning. In the past we only had to deal with the 20-40 plan, which then became the 20-year plan. Later you served your 20 years and you were given a long enough time to change your plans about serving to age 55, or anywhere in between, depending on your goals. Now what happens if you have a three-year CE is you cannot be offered an IPS after that. That's policy. You can be offered another CE and another CE and another CE. Can you imagine a service person after 20 years in; he has taken the three-year CE, and now he has to serve 15 years on three-year contracts, not knowing whether or not he's going to receive another one at the end of the last one. It's going to be very hard on them.

Another problem that has arisen with the offering of these extensions at a time when the 500 series trades are already overborne is what the Canadian Forces has already achieved is further stagnating the career progression of all master corporals and corporals by at least another three to five years. Since there have been basically no promotions for three years already, this makes it a grand total of possibly six to eight years without any promotions. This creates an environment where there's little or no incentive for the junior ranks to do anything more than the bare minimum. There's absolutely no chance of their receiving at least the responsibility and prestige of attaining the next higher rank and absolutely no chance of getting a much-needed pay raise, since in today's forces the only guaranteed pay raise is a promotion.

Something else caused by the situation is we are now going to have a six- to eight-year pause between waves of promotions. Six to eight years in the military constitutes a generation gap. With this six- to eight-year pause, which will be followed by a big influx of promotions, that will be followed again by another generation gap, caused by the five- to six-year freeze on enrolment. That was caused by the downsizing.

• 2000

Now, without a smooth and constant progression of the ranks, what you end up with is a boom year where there are lots of newly promoted people trying to change the world in a very short time. Then you get six to eight years, or whatever the pause may be, of a time of little incentive or little change, and then everybody becomes complacent. Now suddenly that other generation gap comes in, all full of whatever, and they want to change the world again. So you can see there are major clashes that arise from this.

I could tell you that it kept my spirits high knowing that the promotions would have to follow the years 1997 and 1998 because the years 1977 and 1978 were large years for enrolment. Now, thanks to these three-year extensions, that's been pushed back to 2000 and 2001, and who knows what will happen after that.

What I have seen and continue to see is that in an effort to keep our more experienced technicians, what we've inadverently caused is the loss of our best and keenest ones. This is due to the fact that the keen and motivated technicians know that they will excel, given the chance, and because that chance isn't there for them in the military, they leave it and try to find their place in the civilian environment. Besides, why should they stay when they know they're going nowhere fast?

In closing, I'd like to point out the fact that these extensions affect not only the subjects I've already mentioned but also other career advancement policies such as commissioning from the ranks—you have to hold the substantive rank of sergeant to receive that—and university training plans for NCMs, because a three-year extension is not enough.... Say you are at 20 years; if you've got your IPS you would have 15 years left to complete. You could complete the schooling and pay back any obligatory service. With a three-year extension, you might be able to take up home economics or something and pay it back.

What I pose to you as a committee is that we have to ensure that there is a constant fluid career progression in the armed forces, because if there's no chance to excel.... I'll mention a term coined by the American military: be all that you can be. I think our military is in a sorry state indeed.

Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Thank you. Master Corporal Steve Lavoie.

Master Corporal Steve Lavoie (Individual Presentation): Good evening. My name is Master Corporal Lavoie from 42 Radar Squadron.

Over the years I've heard the military say such things as “We are trying to promote good, healthy family values by creating or improving our family services that already exist here” or “We have become involved in community programs such as Scouts or Block Parents to help make the community a better place for you and for your family”. These are admirable achievements and they should be commended on the fine job they are doing. However, it has troubled me in the past to hear friends say that they have to get out of the military after 16 years, four years from their pension, or take a posting away from their family.

The reason I mentioned this incident is because last year my wife had an interview with her career manager in which she was informed that her next posting would be to a ship or out to a field, both of which I cannot be posted to, therefore placing us in that same situation. We have already talked about it and she will get out of the service. We have two young children.

So I have a couple of questions. The first one is how can the military say they are trying to promote good family values and then post one spouse away from their family, causing their children to be separated from their parents?

Second, is this their way of forcing the members to get out in order to decrease the number of military personnel?

Third, what can we, as service members, do to prevent our families from being posted apart? How can our career mangers forecast two years in advance that a member will be required for an operational commitment and therefore justify the posting apart of a married service couple? As we know, there are a lot of married service couples. When you are single in the military, who do you hang around with? Other military and single personnel. You date them, you marry them.

• 2005

Some solutions possibly, within the context of the needs of the military: I would suggest that the career managers practise some management and canvass workers to see who would like to take the posting that's coming available.

There are some personnel who would like to take someone's postings for them but are told that they cannot do that. That actually happened to me when my wife was posted to Gander and I was posted up to Goose Bay. Fortunately we did not have any children at the time. There was a member there with the same rank, same trade, same qualifications. He wanted to go to Gander; my wife wanted to come with me.

In conversation with the career manager, we said, it's one long ferry ride out. That was the only way out of Goose Bay at the time.

He lived in barracks; my wife was in barracks. I'd put everything in my pick-up truck and drive them there. There would be absolutely no cost to the military. Normally they would get half a month's salary. They said, we don't even want that, just let us go there. The response was, absolutely not, that would be setting a precedent. They would not even listen to that.

So we waited it out and luckily we were posted together shortly afterwards.

Perhaps the CF can create a job board on the Internet that our service members could access to see what is currently available and potentially apply for it. This comes from a member I work with. He did some time down in the States, and apparently that is what they do. They can go on the Web, find what is available and apply for it. Then they talk to the family.

Once again, I don't know how the career managers decide on who and where personnel go, but on a wing this size or some of the larger bases out there I don't think it's that hard to keep a corporal posted here.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Mrs. Laura Morin.

Mrs. Laura Morin (Individual Presentation): Good evening. Thanks for coming to Cold Lake. Welcome.

Being married to a member of the military personnel, I'm speaking on behalf of the spouses.

In my career, for 15 years I've worked for the Bank of Montreal. In all our postings I was always fortunate enough to find a branch of the Bank of Montreal within at most a drive of an hour and a half. Since coming to Cold Lake, as there is no Bank of Montreal here, my career has been at a standstill.

I'm still taking correspondence courses, and there are other banks here, but they are far more willing to promote within their own branches than to hire from without. I don't mind having to start over all the time; it's just hard to go from a job that pays about $13 an hour to finding one in Cold Lake that pays $6 or $7 an hour, and you have to pay $3 or $4 for a babysitter.

Another concern I had was that I am the volunteer director for the Allergy Asthma Information Association here in Cold Lake. There is nothing here medically dealing with any kind of allergy support or any medical field at all. We are trying to educate the schools, the restaurants, and the community about how many children now have allergies, asthma, and the concern about anaphylaxis, because we are in such a remote area. In anaphylaxis the throat closes within half an hour, and it has happened in a school here in Cold Lake that a six-year-old boy was held down by three ten-year-olds with a peanut butter sandwich. Now, that sounds kind of silly, but if they had put that in his mouth, I hate to think what may have happened.

• 2010

Those are just two concerns I have, speaking on behalf of the spouses.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Chief Warrant Officer Paul Lacroix.

Chief Warrant Officer Paul Lacroix (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, the stuff I was going to cover has been covered before. I'd like to give the other people in the room a chance to make a briefing. Thank you.

The Chairman: Warrant Officer Cindy Todero is not here. Next is Corporal Sam Mersereau.

Corporal Sam Mersereau (Individual Presentation): Probably a very hard topic in the military today to discuss with anyone is sexual harassment. My husband retired from the military as a chief warrant officer back in 1996, after 31 years, and I'm quite proud of him. A lot of people in this room know him and are very proud of him also.

He's from the old school, and he had a hard time to accept women in the military. Never in his wildest dreams did he ever think his wife loved the military, loved wearing the uniform, and I must admit that for 22 years of our married life I did his uniforms, I polished his boots and his shoes. I don't regret doing that. That's how I was brought up.

Also, in the same breath, it's a learning experience living with someone like that. You tend to grow. I grew to be so independent and have my own mind. I also grew in the fact that women's issues today are very important, be they on social abuse or sexual harassment in the military.

Sometimes subjects are difficult to get across. A lot of people didn't want me to say anything today, but I have let a lot of people walk. Some of those people have been of high management. The lower ranks are on a laughter or joking way....

I will have been in eight years next month. I came in later. I came in from the militia. I did six years in the field. I went to the reserves on the ARAF side. I was qualified. I started units from scratch. I have taken over supervisory positions. I have been moved from job to job that required clean-up experience, and in all my travels I have yet to say to anyone “Do not recommend me for wing commander; do not recommend me for this. I prefer to do my job and to help the people.”

I have been in the gulf, ladies and gentlemen, and that was a very hard decision to make. When I signed on the dotted line, it was because I love my country and I love wearing the uniform. I had courage, I had integrity, I had everything you can name under the word “soldier”.

In the newspaper in January, in the Alberta Sun, I believe it was, a member of the engineers decided he was going to write a letter for the “other people” who have office jobs, who mean nothing in the military. I was quite slighted by that. He worked with land mines, and I appreciate the fact that this is the choice he made, to join and do that. Also, sitting in this room are a lot of people who have office jobs, who have done a world of good for the military, and who have had to put up with some abuse now and then.

• 2015

I have been shot at. I have had a missile drop nine kilometres from my bed. I am suffering from what they tell me is probably post-traumatic syndrome. I have opened a file with Veteran Affairs, and they can't do anything until they go through my file.

I am also an orthopedic patient from running in combat suits. I have let members with officer status get away with everything, where I have been a victim. In order for me to do something about it, I would have to bring in a lot of people, which I don't want to do.

I'm a soldier. I'm a soldier first and I'm damned proud of it. I do a damned good job. I spend 100% to 200% of my life giving to the military. But when people say to me “Because of you and your husband making lots of money, we're in this dilemma”, I resent that remark. I resent the fact that when my husband, who gave 200% also in his 31 years of military life, was asked if he would like what he had been waiting 28 years for, an overseas posting, unfortunately I couldn't take a leave of absence because I'm the FRP for my trade. So I either had to get out or have my husband discuss with people who have potential involvement in my career if I could be stationed with him. The reason they gave him was that only deserving servicemen get those chances.

I have been to the gulf. I have endured enough. I've been to the Golan and I have endured something of unmentionable measures. Then to have someone tell me, with my career, that only deserving people go there—I'm frustrated.

The only thing that's helped me to this day and has saved me and made me try to get out of all these angers and hardships is that they posted me to an all-male unit. I wear blue. I've yet to wear blue; I'm always in green. I don't have a problem with that. It was very difficult for them to understand why they couldn't be my comrades, with a handshake or a pat on the shoulder. They now can do it, because some of them know. Some of them are smart enough to know.

My leadership qualities have always been there. I have given the utmost respect to every officer, every senior NCO, and I've given it to my peers also. On the fatal day of my biggest sexual harassment possible, I saluted my officer because that's what has been instilled in me with the military. He is an officer, and I will uphold that until I retire at the age of one day short of 55.

I don't have a problem being posted. I don't. My children are older. My son is graduating shortly with honours from the University of Manitoba. I have a daughter in high school. In my son's case I had to leave him behind to finish off a year. That was very difficult. A lot of the debts incurred were phone calls. We had no choice. We knew that. But also the military did benefit me by allowing me to have $300 a month for room and board for my son because I left the province.

The military hasn't given me any hardships whatsoever. They have been good to me. People amongst us have not—basically not all of them, but some of them. Some of them are the nicest people you would ever meet and are always there for you.

I know I'm going to be told, come Monday, I have two choices. I'm either going to be posted next year, which means I leave a daughter behind.... If that's the case, that's fine. I have a retired husband. He is now my dependant spouse, and boy, that sounds good out of my mouth. I did do that for a number of years. No, he doesn't do my uniform and polish my shoes or boots; he doesn't know how.

• 2020

What I'm trying to get across is that there are hardships on the civilian side of the world also. There are hardships on the military side of the world. And yes, they have to find funds for themselves on civvy street.

We're unique in the sense that we don't get much notice to go anywhere. I had four days' notice to go to the gulf. I had four days' notice to go to the Golan. I'm always packed and ready. I'm always screened fit; I make sure I do that every year. I'm a true believer. This is my country. If we are in times of need, I hope and pray that someone on the other side of the world will come this way to help us also.

If I had been in the military when my children were younger, my choice would have been to stay home with them, but that's me. It may not be anybody else's choice. Yes, we had our hardships, too. I did work at two jobs, I did work in the evening scrubbing floors. I'm not degrading myself in any way. I'm very proud of that. I gave my son a good education, and my daughter is next on the list.

What I'd like to see happen among our own...and Prince Philip once said that to the Prime Minister of Canada when he came over just after the Oka crisis. He said we should clean up what's in our own backyard first before we go outside of it.

There are a lot of good people here, and there are a lot of understanding people, and there are a lot of people to help each other. But never can I have any feelings for someone who degrades, humiliates and demeans another member of the military. I don't think anyone should have to put up with that.

Right now I have to seek a little bit of counselling. I'm not ashamed to say that. It's my anger that I have to take care of now, because I suppress it. As the padre said, when it starts to explode, you just don't want to be around.

I have wonderful things to say about NDHQ, at the medical hospital there. They have done me a world of good; in fact, it was they who brought it out. I probably would not have have come out of this for years. They have been wonderful.

As for what Chief Warrant Officer Scott and Lieutenant-Colonel Fash said, we need the medical facility here. We need those people to help us on the mental and physical sides. There's a waiting list of five months. I have been waiting five years; I suppose I can wait five more months.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Master Warrant Officer Yvonne Boisclair.

Master Warrant Officer Yvonne Boisclair (Individual Presentation): Good evening. I'm here representing the air reserves, 4 Wing Cold Lake, and I have a couple of positive points to put forth, although I'm not going to say these positive points came up overnight. We waited a long, long time for them to come through.

With the reserves in the past year we've come up with a lot of good points. As I said, we've been waiting a long, long time. I was hoping they'd come through before I had to retire.

With the exception of a few glitches with our new pay system, which people have been seeing across the country, things have been pretty good for us this year. As the pay problems do arise with our personnel, the people at 4 Wing have been very good at trying to solve the problems. People haven't had to go without a pay, because they've been able to procure local payment for them.

One of the benefits that came through this year was our retirement gratuity package, which was backdated to April 1, 1997. This gives us a severance package, a one-week salary for every year served in the reserves. It can mean a good benefit for anyone who is about to retire. We got our pay comparability of 85% of the regular force salary, also backdated to April 1, 1997. We are expecting to have increases in our IPCs, which is incentive pay category. From what we've been told, they've been approved but not implemented to date.

• 2025

They have also come in line with relocation of class B annotated positions for reservists. In other words, if a reservist wants to apply for a position in B.C. or Ontario, there's now a chance for them to pay the money for them to move.

Personnel on long-term class B contracts are entitled to PMQs if they are available in that particular area. At present they are also working on specialty pay incentives for our personnel.

These things that have come true for the reservists are making our lives a lot better. There will always be problems to be dealt with, but if you stay around long enough things do come true, and I'm very proud of that.

Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Captain Maureen Sutton is not here. She left.

Hansa Thaleshvar.

Ms. Hansa Thaleshvar (Individual Presentation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wasn't planning to speak here today. I just came to listen to what people had to say. But after hearing a few comments I was compelled to make a few of my own, specifically to add the community's voice in support of military personnel: how we feel about them, how good a job they do for a country called Canada, and how proud we are of them.

Right now I am chairing a committee called Target Top Gun. A committee was set up to provide support to 4 Wing and to the NATO flight training contract initiative, which you have probably heard about. The committee is totally volunteer and it's community based. Initially when we set up the committee, of course we raised thousands of dollars to host the guests who are coming and to tell them the community of Cold Lake has a quality of life second to none.

This is where I want to emphasize quality of life. Health concerns and education were mentioned earlier. Then I will touch on ASD, having had first-hand experience living with a husband who comes home to tell me stories about it every day.

The health care concerns are for the whole community. We have been very fortunate in being able to use the services the military has provided, specifically in the area of mental health. I believe if we are going to work towards attracting foreign countries to train here, it adds to the urgency. Certainly our personnel's concerns are important, but they would agree that it adds to the urgency. That's why we need to address those concerns and rectify them immediately.

I believe it has gone too far with the madness of cutbacks. We need to pull back a little and look at the real things, which are the people providing the services to the community, to Canada, and to the whole world. So my request in that regard is that health concern issues be taken very seriously and rectified immediately.

On education, my concerns are twofold. One, I'm sure I don't need to remind you—it was in the news last night—how the students have protested across Canada about rising tuition costs. I have a daughter who is a university student. She's carrying a $20,000-plus debt load right now. I don't believe that's a very good way for young people to start their working life.

• 2030

There is nothing wrong with paying for the education, but there are no jobs for students that pay enough to cover those costs. Tuition alone and books are over $4,000, and to live in Edmonton, away from home, running a second household, leaves $10,000 if you live on the poverty line.

If you want to meet my daughter, she will tell you how students are living below the poverty line.

That issue as to how we can resolve that problem is very urgent. We have young people going to higher education and helping us expand our global economy.

I may have digressed somewhat from the issues that are addressed here, but I believe it is extremely important that we pay attention to education.

The second concern is adult education. I also chair the adult education council in our community, and again that has been an ongoing struggle to provide the kinds of courses that we need here.

Specifically, although we have very good providers locally who provide courses where people's needs are met to some degree, the problem is that when we try to broker in some courses the base funding is not there for those institutions to move away from the major centres and it's costing a lot more to bring those courses here. That's a higher education need. If we're going to have adults learning through their lives, it needs to be addressed.

The other part of that adult learning would be of course distance education through technology use. We need to concentrate a great deal in that area as well. Although we have heard a lot about technology and what not, we really need to put some more, should I say, money where our mouths are.

Of course the last is the ASD. My husband works for AETE. I'm not here to tell you how bad everything is. He has been there for 26 years. He enjoys his job thoroughly, because it's scientific research work. It's challenging work. It's new projects every time. AETE is an institution or organization in which you collect scientific and technological knowledge that you're going to have a hard time finding anywhere else. I believe that if we don't value that knowledge, it's only going to be us who will pay for it later.

On ASD, I hear all kinds of things in the community: that the government now has no choice but to implement ASD because there is a fair amount of resources already spent in the process. I would ask you to reconsider that. If that's the case, please consider if ASD really offers the value in the way of what the function of the military as a whole is—if it addresses that, if it also addresses the cost effectiveness, and third, but most important, if it also addresses the people. If it makes sense, if it benefits all of those, then you should consider it. But otherwise I think we really need to give it a good look.

The blind faith that the private sector does everything well.... I think there is lots of research that would indicate to you otherwise. So do it please, but with second thoughts, with a careful look at it.

Finally, I think we have heard a lot about how governments have messed up with the military in the past. That is past. We have heard very heartfelt appeals today from personnel on 4 Wing as to what can be done and what needs to be done. I think the important thing is that all people in Parliament or in the government work together and not use the military as a kind of hot potato to toss from one to another but resolve those issues, because if we don't have a strong military.... Somebody quoted Churchill. I think for that reason it's very important that we do have strong armed forces.

• 2035

Thank you very much for your time. I hope you will come back again.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you, Hansa, for your comments. I agree wholeheartedly about the importance of the military.

My question is for just a bit of clarification. You said someone has said the military can't back away from this program of moving to ASD because of the money invested in the process. I would just like to know where that came from and what you were told the reasoning was for not being able to change because of that.

I do agree, by the way, that the private sector doesn't always deliver services in the most efficient and cost-effective way.

Ms. Hansa Thaleshvar: It comes to me. There is no definite source. People are reluctant to identify where it's coming from.

But the process has been going on for a long time now. That's another thing. I think it's causing a lot of frustration because of the time it's taking. The decision needs to be made; yes or no, just make the decision, so people can get on with their lives.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Ladies and gentlemen, we'll come back at 8.30 p.m.

• 2038

• 2232

The Chairman: Welcome back, everyone. We will start off where we ended. I now call on Kate Hepple.

Ms. Kate Hepple (Individual Presentation): Good evening, everyone. I'm representing spouses, I guess. There are a few things I wanted to touch on. Some of them have already been touched on, but you haven't heard from very many spouses, so I thought I would give you some of our points of view.

We talked about distance from our families. It's a big deal for us because we don't get to see our parents and our kids don't get to see their grandparents very often. Often we're lucky enough to get on a pri-5 and we get out to Ontario and we see our families and then we hope to get on a pri-5 back but we get stuck. It might be nice if when we're guaranteed a pri-5 out we're guaranteed a pri-5 back. Often I've gone out and had to pay for three of us to come back, which is quite an expense. It's nice to be able to get out there for free, but it would be nice to know you can get back for free. It was my choice to come along with my spouse, but I'm still halfway across the country from my family.

Education and children.

We were posted from Ottawa. I had a neighbour who was posted in from Nova Scotia just before I left, and she had a great deal of trouble adapting to life in Ottawa, as opposed to life in Nova Scotia. Her kids were also set back one year in school, which can be pretty hard on kids. If you're used to being in class with seven-year-olds and then you're put back in with six-year-olds, that can be quite difficult for kids. I've heard that if you're coming east to west, the kids tend to have a hard time adjusting in school and they are kept back, whereas if you're going west to east they tend to be more advanced. Just the different school systems between the provinces make it really hard on the kids.

Education for spouses: there's really nothing up here. I already have a BA, but I would like to continue my education and upgrade it some more, and I got here not being able to do anything. There are correspondence courses, but often what is offered isn't necessarily what you're looking for. We're really limited for that up here, and that's really frustrating.

If you're somewhere else and you start an education, chances are you're not going to be able to finish it before you get posted again. That's pretty tough on spouses too.

• 2235

Jobs for spouses: Before we came here I studied and wrote provincial exams to become a financial adviser for London Life. I was in my position for six months and then we got posted. When I got here, I found out that I'd have to study again and rewrite provincial exams. To me it's not worth it, because I'll do that and then we might get posted again.

It's funny. In Ottawa I was working and I listened to other wives who weren't working saying, “What's the point? I'm not going to bother to go out and get a job. My husband is just going to get posted. I'm just going to get going in my career and we're going to have to leave again.” I thought, gee, what a poor attitude; go out and get a job anyway, just to keep yourself busy. It wasn't until I got here and I was actually faced with that myself that I thought, yes, I can kind of understand why you wouldn't want to keep starting over again with each new city. Coming from Ontario, from making $30,000 a year, to here and looking at minimum wage at $5 or $6 an hour is really hard on your self-esteem.

I thought to myself, I'm not going to work for $5 or $6 an hour. I have a university degree and to me it's not worth it. By the time I pay for day care, I might as well stay home.

Luckily, we're able to do that. We haven't got so much financially in debt that we can't live on one income.

That's another problem that's posed when you have two incomes and you're posted and then you go down to one income. We all know that when you have two incomes at, say, $40,000 a year you get used to spending money at $40,000 a year. So you might have two cars and therefore two car payments. That can be really difficult, because you get posted and the wife loses her job and you're down to one income, but you still have all the bills that you had accrued with two incomes. A lot of military families get themselves into a financial bind because they're used to living on two incomes. They get posted and they have to go down to living on one income, which can be really difficult and can put a lot of strain on the family.

The financial stresses are probably one reason why we're seeing such a huge increase in separation and divorce.

Talking about separation and divorce, they are pretty high. A lot of times if you're in a queue and you leave your husband for whatever reason, it's the wife and the kids who get kicked out of the queue and they're out living on the economy. Usually women don't make the same amount of money as men make. I don't know of any provision for the non-military members. I don't think they're going to pay for me to go back to Ontario because my husband and I have split up.

So that needs to be addressed too. If we split up, send us back to where our families are if that's where we want to go.

I've talked about pay.

We passed our medical when we came here. My daughter has a pacemaker. We came here. My husband was sent off on a JLC, so I had seven weeks to get used to this place all by myself. I took my eight-year-old into Cold Lake hospital with an ear infection. I spent two hours there and was told to go home. Nobody looked at her. This is a kid who has a pacemaker. If she gets an internal infection throughout her body, it can be quite serious.

The medical facilities up here at the Cold Lake hospital.... I don't know what's going on there, but the attitudes that you get when you go there are disgusting. I've spoken with a lot of other women about it, and they have had a lot of the same problems. I've heard that women will go to the hospital with their kids and be told that they won't call a doctor until there are at least ten people waiting. So unless you're bleeding to death....

Actually, we heard this afternoon that even if you are bleeding to death they can't always help you.

I recently had a baby. I decided to have my baby in Bonnyville, but that's a half-hour drive. We also have medical expenses because we have to drive to Edmonton every six months for my eight-year-old.

So I can imagine how difficult it would be for someone who has a medical problem where they have to go once a month or once a week. It's definitely a concern up here.

I think I've covered everything. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Mr. Hanger.

Mr. Art Hanger: I was sitting here thinking as you were going through your list of concerns. Something sort of popped into my mind. I don't know if I should express it, but I'm going to express it anyway, just to see if I do get some form of reaction.

• 2240

It seemed as if one person could actually think, with all the events taking place around me, the best thing to do would be to step out of it all; even to step out of the military. If this is in fact the thought, that there are forces that are seemingly coming into play and really are discouraging ones, it generates this kind of thinking in military personnel. Have you had anyone express that to you at all?

Ms. Kate Hepple: I'm not sure I understand your question.

Mr. Art Hanger: A myriad of things are going on...sometimes maybe even attitudes are displayed that are more discouraging overall than positive. I know we're sitting here listening to concerns expressed by military personnel, and I know it can't all be bleak, but at the same time some of it must be very overwhelming, to the point where you're saying “I don't think they want me around here”.

Ms. Kate Hepple: I think if you wanted to adopt that attitude, it would be fairly easy to adopt.

Military life is really new for me. I've been in it for about three years. I was in Ottawa for two of those years and I've been in Cold Lake for a year. I had to make choices when we came to Cold Lake, and I made those choices. In a lot of ways I've gained a lot, coming here. I've done a lot of volunteer work. I'm involved with a lot of different boards and committees. I've learned an awful lot, and continue to learn a lot, as a result of becoming involved in the community. I have been given a lot and I have tried to give back a lot.

I think it depends on what you're willing to give and what you're willing to take, and on having a positive attitude. I have little kids at home, so I personally don't too much mind having to give up my career for now so I can stay at home with them. Living in Cold Lake, with the Qs being so inexpensive, allows me to do that. We didn't get head over heels in debt when we were both working, so I also have the ability to stay at home, financially. I'm lucky. But there are people who don't have the choices I have.

Mr. Art Hanger: And they may be more overwhelming to them.

You've been able to strike a balance, still.

Ms. Kate Hepple: Yes.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Naomi Pickford is not here.

Susan Izatt.

Ms. Susan Izatt-Coe (Individual Presentation): Good evening.

I have only one concern, and that is spousal employment transfers within PSP. PSP was known as NPF. Now it's personnel support programs. It's a very large agency and it has grown enormously over the last 18 months. It's across Canada at every single base. It includes the cleaners on base, your CANEX, which is your local shop, the people who serve you and cook you your meals each evening, the family resource centre, and the recreation resource centre. On this base alone we have over 400 spouses who are involved in the PSP employment options. As I said, there are thousands within Canada. To my knowledge there is no employment transfer system in place within PSP.

I have been with NPF since 1986. I have been in Winnipeg, Baden-Soellingen, Germany, and Cold Lake. During that time I have been very fortunate that I haven't had to start at the bottom. There are many other women who have had to start at the bottom when they have gone through. There is no recognition. There is no system whatsoever in there for seniority.

Now is a perfect time within the PSP, since it is a brand new system, still developing its policies and procedures, for you to support having a system in place so we can be transferred from base to base without losing our seniority, our status, or anything else that goes along with that. Whether you're a cleaner or a manager makes no difference, employment is really important. The public service sector is very good at doing this across Canada, and I think it would be a good idea if the PSP followed that system.

So my question to you is can a networking system be put in place to ensure continuous employment is available within the PSP?

Thank you.

• 2245

The Chairman: Thank you very much for your suggestion.

Debbie Crosby.

Ms. Debbie Crosby (Individual Presentation): First, I'd like to say thank you for your patience. You folks have been listening really hard all afternoon.

Some of what I'm going to say has already been brought up. I'm hoping that I can add a little bit to it.

The first item is for someone who was unable to be here this afternoon and is regarding the issue of spouses who leave a high-paying job in another region to follow their partner here, only to discover a lack of skilled employment available and find themselves stocking shelves at the IGA as opposed to being legal assistants or dental assistants or whatever they were in their previous life. That puts numerous stressors on the family.

A possible solution for that would be that perhaps an agreement could be reached with Human Resources Development Canada to allow military partners extended benefits if they cannot find employment once they've been relocated due to spousal relocation. It would be an additional compensation if that could indeed be put in place.

Another issue for me personally is the lack of employment insurance services that are available here in the community. When I started, there was one person who would come into town one day a week, and her role was to help if you were looking for training or educational supplements while you were on unemployment insurance. She is no longer with HRDC. She has been transferred to the province. The only way I can find out anything about my claim is to use the 1-800 number, and it is almost impossible to get service. I have got some extremely rude treatment from them.

It would be very helpful if there could be someone on site here, even for only one day a week, to answer questions and provide information for people who are in receipt of employment insurance.

With Cold Lake becoming Alberta's newest city, maybe that could help to bring about some changes.

I was very pleased with Chief Scott's suggestion regarding vignettes to improve the general public's perception of the Canadian Forces. We really need to do this. I think the general public doesn't fully know or understand what the Canadian Forces do, how they do it, the pressures that are put on them while they're doing it. I don't believe they have the pride or even the accurate information regarding the Canadian Forces.

I am extremely proud of my husband. I'm very proud of my military community, and I would like to see other Canadians experience this pride.

With morale being what it is, an improvement in public perception, a real valuing of the Canadian Forces and their members, would go a long way toward improving the morale situation.

As a final comment, there are positives. We've heard a couple already this afternoon.

My positive is that since I came to Cold Lake in July, I have been given an opportunity to take French language training. That is through the base, through the Canadian Forces. I'm very grateful for it and I'd like to say thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

We have one speaker left on our list, but before we adjourned for dinner, when I asked who wanted to speak tonight, a few hands went up.

It might be possible for you just to go to the table to register so I could have a list of names of people who want to come.

The last one I have is Simone Olofson.

Ms. Simone Olofson (Individual Presentation): I worked as an employee with MFCS for nearly five years. During that time I was responsible for the supervision of the local youth centre and the newspaper program.

During my time there I noticed many abuses of power and general lack of knowledge of my supervisors and the manager of MFCS of how to run the programs they had set up.

• 2250

My colleague, a fellow ex-employee, and I tried to bring some of these abuses to the attention of our supervisors. We were ignored. When we tried to take these issues higher, to the MFCS chairman of the board of directors, then to the wing admin officer, we began to experience nasty repercussions from the manager of MFCS and her subordinates, our bosses.

The abuses we noticed were suicidal teens. Two teens came to me and told me they wished to commit suicide. When I brought this to the attention of the education coordinator, she filed the information and did nothing.

Second, we were told to confiscate cigarettes from the teens. If we had done this we would have been guilty of theft. We found this out by asking an RCMP officer about this.

Third, the MFCS manager lied to the teens about the sleep-over policies that had been put forward by the base commander.

Fourth, children in the before- and after-school programs were being left without sufficient adult supervision.

I was discriminated against and humiliated by these people, in that they did not want to give me a religious holiday I had asked for. They called the military police and said I had the smell of alcohol on my breath when I had one beer two hours before work.

They harassed me at work by coming in during my shift and finding fault with everything I did, even though the teenagers present knew I know my job, since I was doing a good job, and couldn't understand why they were acting so miserably toward me. They eventually invented enough problems with my work and used the incident with the one beer to fire me. My colleague was simply given no more shifts because she was supporting me.

When we tried to find work elsewhere we found no one in this area would employ us. I am now employed by my father. Suspicious of this, my colleague asked a friend to phone and, posing as a possible employer, ask about her. The youth programs coordinator, our supervisor, gave her a very bad reference on her work, which until she began supporting me had been praised by our bosses. We discovered we were both blackballed in this area by MFCS.

My associate and I have researched some information at the provincial level. We have discovered that the day care on the base, because it is on crown land, is under no obligation to be licensed. This means if NPF wants to save money by having 25 kids to one day care worker they can, and they can get away with it, because they are not accountable to the provincial government. We know this is possible because it has happened before. We have a letter by an ex-employee of MFCS who experienced this. Military parents should not have to worry about the safety of their children because of the poor management of MFCS supervisors.

We're also aware that a supervisor of MFCS earns $2,800 clear a month. That works out to about $42,000 a year. This is not even a senior supervisory position. The person in question has very limited post-secondary education. As a point of interest, a person with a master's degree in psychology or social work starts at about $40,000. Local social services agencies do not pay nearly this amount for employees with a master's degree. It's a pity military members cannot hope to earn the kind of money at the beginning of their careers that an MFCS supervisor earns.

As well, the people under these supervisors, their employees, can earn between $6 and $8 per hour as casual and part-time staff. Considering that most of these employees are the spouses of military personnel and have made sacrifices in their own careers for the military, it is hard to accept that a very few earn so much money while the great majority earn so little.

• 2255

I would like to see this committee examine the credentials of the manager and supervisors of MFCS and compare their salaries. I'd also like to see an independent and true inquiry into MFCS for the past several years. I have a list of a roomful of people who are ex-employees of this MFCS, and they will not stand up here and say anything, because their husbands work for the military and they're afraid of repercussions.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Master Corporal Ike Blum.

Master Corporal Ike Blum (Individual Presentation): Good evening. My name is Master Corporal Ike Blum and I'm employed at 410 Squadron. I'd like to put something positive out first before I start on some of my personal problems.

This is my second tour at the base. I've been at other bases, and I must say this is the best base, bar none, that I've been at in terms of the things we do here and the way we work here.

I'd also like to say that the air force is still a good organization. Unfortunately, however, the people who delegate the work we have to do sometimes don't understand how we go about our business and how we should go about our business. These are not our commanding officers; these are the people at government level who delegate to us the way we should work.

For instance, regarding our pay and benefits, I listened to the chief's speech this afternoon, and I can't top that at all. However, I also was part of the quality of life conference in January 1997 in Winnipeg, and we brought up many points.

We're always talking here about social problems in the military and everything, but if we look back and see what we're paying our members for what they're actually doing, and that some members, not necessarily at this base but at bigger centres like Toronto and Ottawa, can't even make ends meet under normal conditions and have to get out and get a secondary job, we see that this is where our problems are coming from. This tears away at the family unit, and this is where our problems are coming from. This is why people have to see our social workers, our padres, and I think this should be addressed earnestly and very quickly.

Our disposable income in our pockets actually is being whittled away. There is nothing left. Yes, we've had a little bit of a raise here and there—as somebody said today, enough to piss us off, which is a fact.

The other thing we have to look at—and we brought it up in our meeting in Winnipeg, at the Air Command quality of life meeting—is to make it worth while for the member to come from, say, Alberta and go to Ontario, so that he still has the same disposable income in his pocket, as long as the person lives within the same means as he did in Alberta, or wherever in this country. Right now this is not happening.

I just came back from Ontario, and I'm glad I'm here, but when you move to Ontario the tax base is different, licensing costs more money, etc. Yes, we're getting a moving grant and we're getting a little bit of a posting grant, but when you figure all that in, it does not cover what you have to live with for the next couple of years while you're living there.

Hockey for kids and everything else is more expensive. Okay, fine and dandy, some of us are making in the neighbourhood of $40,000 a year. If the disposable income I have here in Alberta is more, then I can afford more and I can afford to give more to fund my family. I won't need a secondary job and I won't get torn away from my family. For this reason, I'm up here today and I urge you to take this back to the people.

I'm not looking for a big raise or whatever, but I'm looking to be able to say, yes, I have the same in my pocket in Alberta as I would have in Ontario or wherever we're going. Yes, the members do deserve a raise, and I hope there's a substantial raise forthcoming—10% or 15% would look great—but I know it's a dream.

The other thing I would like to address is our spouses. First of all, they're never recognized and I'd like to recognize them here tonight. They do a lot of work while we are gone, while we are at work, while we work extensive hours, while we're gone at a moment's notice. They stay home, they look after the children, they pay our bills and whatever. I think what we should do to help them out is organize things so that, whether we're deployed on a United Nations tour or just on course or wherever, they can go and network amongst themselves, or go to the base or somewhere—or any base, for that matter—and seek help. The help is not necessarily readily available. Yes, there's help out there, but I don't think it's as readily available as people think. I think we should make it really readily available for them.

• 2300

The other thing I would like to address is jobs for our spouses. We left here in 1996—luckily, we're back in 1997—and went to CFB Petawawa. My wife left a good job here. In Petawawa jobs were hard to find, to start with, and as soon as they found out my wife was a military spouse, bingo, there was no job. Why? Because we're training you, we're teaching you everything you need to know, and then in four years or so you're out of here again and we've lost.

I think it's an education process. I think we have not educated our civilian counterparts enough to say that our spouses have the same value as the person who walks down the street without a uniformed person on their arm. They have the same education, the same value, and there's no more guarantee that a civilian person will stay five or six years than that our spouses will.

I think what we have to put in place finally is a system to educate people, because all in all what is happening is that all these people in the military now are highly skilled tradesmen—and as far as I'm concerned, underpaid—but these are the people who will eventually bring their vast knowledge and training, which the government has paid for, into the civilian world to carry on. I really urge somebody to address this.

On a bit of a personal note, and this is really close to me, I asked to be posted back to Cold Lake not knowing in the meantime what had happened here at CFB Cold Lake while I was gone. I really don't want to go into the actual details, but there had been some accusations made against my family while I was posted in Petawawa.

I ask for a posting, I pass the screening with flying colours, my furniture is packed, my truck is here to pick up my furniture, and I get notice that I have to see my commanding officer. I'm not going to Cold Lake. That's a surprise to me. I go down to ask what is going on. Well, we don't know, we have no idea, something is cooking in Cold Lake, they won't tell us. I say, fine and dandy, let's hurry up and find out what's going on. I am put in the chief's office, raked over the coals, more or less, because at that time.... “You should know what's going on”, you know.

But that's not relevant. The relevant thing here is that accusations were made, my posting was stopped. It got to the point where our family was victimized. Our furniture was loaded, I had to live in hotels, my kids were now an extra two weeks out of school, and now they're having a hard time.

When I addressed the alleged problem, I could not get any information. It's under investigation, and I couldn't get anything. That put a severe burden on my family.

When I talked to the civilian authorities who got involved in Ontario and they did their investigation on behalf of the authorities there, they said it was fine and dandy, there was nothing wrong. I could go to Cold Lake.

It still seemed that I was victimized. I still had no information about what was going on. I asked for somebody to represent me on this base, and I still heard nothing.

I did eventually get here, the investigation kept going on here and, whatever had transpired, we were vindicated. They were all false acquisitions.

What I would like to bring to light is this, and I know this would never happen on civilian street, because I asked civilian authorities. I had asked for a PMQ in MacKenzie. I was denied access to MacKenzie because of allegations that had not been proven at that point. It would never have happened on civilian street. Why can it happen in the military? Why can I be stopped from going somewhere purely on allegations? On civilian street, as I find out, I would have had alternatives. I could have gone the legal way.

However, ahead of time I knew there was no guilty party in my family, and I'm taking that as it is and I will not pursue it any further. However, another point that irks me is why is there a double standard? Why are the military authorities' standards different from the civilian authorities' standards when we're all citizens of Canada?

Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Thank you, sir.

Mr. Hanger, do you have a question?

Mr. Art Hanger: Yes, I do have a question.

• 2305

Master Corporal, I'm kind of curious. Without going into any detail—I'm not really interested in the details—regarding this situation that developed as you were about to move to Cold Lake, was it cleared away?

MCpl Ike Blum: Actually, it was cleared away just before Christmas, so about two months after I got here it was cleared away.

Mr. Art Hanger: You're satisfied that it's all finalized?

MCpl Ike Blum: I'm satisfied that it's finalized to the point where I have been told that the file is closed, that it's cleared away. I still don't have details. I found out through the civilian authorities just two days ago that I have to go through the Access to Information Act to obtain any further information.

Mr. Art Hanger: Fair enough.

I have another point. When you were about to move—and I've heard of similar situation developing, where additional costs were burdensome on the individual who was caught up in it—were you compensated for any of the hotel bills?

MCpl Ike Blum: I was compensated for my meals and my hotels. However, I wasn't compensated for other things. I actually didn't ask for everything that I spent money on for the simple reason that I'm not that kind of person. But I'm sure that, within reason, everything would have been paid for, because I've been paid for what I asked for.

Mr. Art Hanger: Fair enough. Thank you.

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Just for clarification, did you ever find out what the accusations were and who had made the accusations?

MCpl Ike Blum: The accusations were against my children, sir. I know what the accusations were, yes. I was told those in many different ways, from severe, serious things to child things, whatever. Yes, I did find out, but I never did find out legally or through the authorities who had made those accusations or why. I don't know any of that at all. I was never privy to that information.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

MCpl Ike Blum: You're welcome.

Mr. John Richardson: Corporal, since you were under investigation and it was never disclosed to you.... It's hard to believe that in a democratic society this is being held from you.

MCpl Ike Blum: Sir, I wasn't under investigation; my children were under investigation. But I felt the whole family was under investigation. It was that serious.

Okay, I won't use any names. The allegation was that my children had homosexual tendencies, that my children were doing that amongst themselves, my two boys, plus that they were doing that in our old home; when we lived in MacKenzie before that, they were doing that with children in MacKenzie, apparently with seven other people.

Now, that's fine and dandy. That's a serious accusation. I broke down and cried and everything else, because the first accusation told to me at CFB Petawawa by my deputy commanding officer was that my son was being charged with rape.

But that's not what is relevant. What's relevant is that to this date...and now I have to go through the Access to Information Act to find out every single detail because my son, at 14 years of age, wants to know. He wants to know why, he wants to know where. He's the one who knew he wasn't guilty. He's the one who volunteered to go for a lie detector test. To this date, I have none of that information—how it originated, who was involved, none of it. All I have is an accusation. Yes, it was clear that it was just an accusation. But now I feel victimized and my family feels victimized.

First of all, I would have loved to reside in MacKenzie. I have a lot of friends over there. I was not allowed to. To a point I can see it. To another point I can't, because this would never happen in the civilian community.

The other thing is what do I tell my children? Where do I get the information? Yes, I've talked to a social worker here on the base, who has been very helpful.

Mr. John Richardson: You have the right of access to information, like any citizen in Canada has, and you can apply for that, but that's up to you.

MCpl Ike Blum: That's tomorrow's date, sir.

Mr. John Richardson: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Sergeant Dale Lyne.

Sergeant Dale Lyne (Individual Presentation): Good evening. Thank you for coming to Cold Lake to visit us up here. As you have seen, a lot of points are coming to the surface, which the media does not see, about what goes on behind the gates of a base like this.

I'm a sergeant in the military. I'm in my twenty-second year now. I've had 10 postings in 22 years. I'm in a support grade, and we tend to move a lot.

• 2310

One point I have is on eye care. It was brought up previously by another individual, on the restrictions of the eyeglass policy.

Contact lenses are readily available in the real world. They have been for a very long time. But we cannot get contact lenses through the military. We have to get them out of our own pockets, with no compensation.

I have a lot of friends in the RCMP and among city police officers. Especially the RCMP—if they want contact lenses they get them.

Another problem with people with vision like mine.... I'm a V4; I've got white canes on the bumper of my truck when I drive.

There's a process called laser K surgery that's been around for quite a few years. It has been perfected. It's 99% guaranteed to work. People like myself with very poor eyesight have no access to it in the military. It's around $2,500 per eye to get done, but the military does not recognize it. They will not authorize you to have it done. If you do have it done, it's done out of your own pocket and any time off for recovery is out of your pocket.

We have had some air crews with people who've had eye accidents whose eyesight has deteriorated. They don't get laser K surgery.

It's a very simple process now, but it's never been looked at. It's been just pushed aside. You get your glasses every two years for so many dollars and that's the end of it.

On morale, I've just left Halifax, in August. Somebody had mentioned about the morale being good in Esquimalt. I could speak from Halifax, where, yes, the sailors are pretty happy, because, one, they finally got new ships. The city class frigates are long overdue to replace those old museum pieces they were forced to represent Canada in, which was an embarrassment. They did a fine job with what they had, though. Now we have new ships. They're happy with the new ships.

With the navy, they pick their east or west coast billet when they join and they stay there for their career. Their wife stays there for their career; their family stays there for their career for the most part. I know the officers have to go to Ottawa now because MARCOM has been closed and there are more naval postings, but they have a stable lifestyle in one area. So when they retire their house is paid for. Their kids have been in the same school system for that career. Even though they do their long tours for the NATO tours at sea, or in the gulf, or wherever they're sent to, they still at least know when their career is done their house is paid for and they can pretty well stay where they're at and they have a pretty good lifestyle.

But for the rest of the armed forces, especially for us that move a lot, the morale is very low. Despite the benefits and allowances they get, it costs people a lot when they move.

On schooling, one thing we should be looking at in Canada is what the Americans have. It's the Montgomery U.S. GI Bill. When you do your time, on completing the military you get up to U.S. $40,000 worth of college education if you have the marks to get into a college. That's something Canada should be looking at for its armed forces. This GI bill has been around for years, since Vietnam. We have nothing even close to it in Canada. We have SCAN, which is around $2,500 that you get to find your next career when you get out.

On schooling for the people who have sons and daughters in university, I lived in Germany for seven years and there, for the German children, if they had the marks to get into university and they were accepted, their education was free for the most part, whether it was university or an apprenticeship. That's what you, as MPs, should be looking at, and improving access to secondary education, because, as you are seeing now, there is protest across Canada by students who are having huge bills, as the people around here have mentioned.

Our future is our people. Our future is our children. Right now, only around 20% of Canadians have a post-secondary education. When we're competing against the Europeans or the Asians, who have a far higher percentage of educated people, we're having to import these people into Canada to take over our jobs. We have Canadians who are just as able to do these jobs, but, for money purposes, they have not been able to get a master's degree in chemical engineering or whatever they require to work at a major firm.

On our reserves, with the ice problem in eastern Canada we had about 3,000 reserves who did a really fine job. My parents got their power back in eastern Ontario just yesterday, after three weeks, and the reserves are really helping them out. They stood on their heads.

In Canada we have no mandatory job protection for our reserves like the Americans and the Europeans have. When they deploy to the gulf, whether a British volunteer service or a U.S. guardsmen, their job is protected. In Canada in some cases the reservists are afraid to tell their employer that they are in the reserves, because the employer is going to think, well, this man might be going away on an exercise or to Cyprus or whatever. Unfortunately the average Canadian citizen knows this much about what has gone on in the Canadian Forces since the Second World War.

• 2315

I challenge you to take it upon yourselves to enact some form of job protection for our reserves. We need them. Now that we are down to 60,000, and possibly down to 43,000 by the year 2004, whenever ASD kicks in in full force, we need our reserves. The ice storm proved it.

Right now we have this Mickey Mouse Canadian Forces Liaison Council, where every so often the base public affairs officer will bring all the CEOs in from Eaton, Canadian Tire, Sears, whoever is around there, take them for an APC ride, give them some C-rations, and make a pivotal speech in the base paper and the local Petawawa paper about “how I look after my reserves”.

Some companies such as Canadian Tire have made an in-house policy, but we are just depending on the niceness of these CEOs to do this. We have to take care of our reserves, ladies and gentlemen, and it's up to you, as members of Parliament for this great country, to ensure that happens. Our reg forces are stretched too thin now, and our only assistance now, short of going out of country, is to use our reserves as they deserve to be used.

On the public service, even though very few public service jobs are available, we as service members are barred from public service competitions. In a lot of cases we are very well qualified to compete for these competitions, but the public service, through job protection, has shut us out.

But there are two standards here. A couple of years ago there was a thing on the news where through modern biology there's a form of improving milk production through the genetics of dairy cattle. In Europe and the States they do it. They are thinking about bringing this into Canada to improve milk production. Well, they had a press conference in the scrum outside in the hallway where you people work, and lo and behold, an assistant deputy minister was giving a speech on genetics and milk production in Canada and how they are going to study it and all that.

The assistant deputy minister for health is former Lieutenant-General Kent Foster. Anybody who has been in the Airborne knows who he is. He was in charge of the Oka crisis to a certain extent.

There are two standards going on here. How are we barred from competitions...and we don't have a lot of big pensions in this room. I know this individual has a very good pension. He served his country. He did well. Now he's making six figures, and he's just a deputy minister. How did he get that job? We never see that, but we saw it on TV. It was there in black and white on CBC. There are two standards.

Service wives.

I served seven years in Germany. I was very fortunate to get two tours in Europe to see how it's done by the big boys overseas. We had the U.S. Stars and Stripes magazine, which is the big newspaper the U.S. armed forces have had since the Second World War, delivered in Baden and Lahr every day from Frankfurt or Karlsruhe. In it you always saw full-page ads showing prices from Frankfurt back to New York City or Philadelphia, $200 or $300. Again, in their armed forces during my first tour, there were 300,000 people in uniform in the 1970s. Obviously they had the numbers we did. We had 8,000.

Why can't we do that in Canada? We are seeing all these problems where people are trying to get back to see their families.

The mother of a friend of mine in Edmonton died in Montreal in November. It cost him $2,500 to fly back and bury his mother in Montreal because they couldn't get him on a service flight. He put his release in because of it and he's now gone. A very young chief warrant officer said it was the last straw, because we couldn't support our people.

We should possibly be looking at the Americans and Europeans to see what they have for military benefits. I know they have the same problems as we have here, but there are U.S. embassies, British embassies, and German embassies in Ottawa, where you all work. I challenge you to go to talk to the military liaison people and find out what they are going through. They are all going through downsizing as we are. Find out what their solutions are to these problems. We in Canada tend to be too geographic. We are afraid to look outside our country to solve problems. You have the tools to use right there in Ottawa.

On the state of the armed forces as the public looks at them, the proudest moment of my military career.... I was a member of the 4 Combat Engineer Regiment in Germany, and we were the first ones in Yugoslavia in March of 1992. For six months, under Major-General Lewis MacKenzie, who was the finest general this country has seen since General Crerar in the Second World War.... We'd have died for that man. Unfortunately, he was an exception to the rule.

• 2320

While I was there on 4 CER, we had members killed and wounded. I myself was out in minefields extracting body parts to give to the RCMP to take back to the coroner so the families could have closure on their lost or loved ones. I was involved in incidents where I've been marched around with a loaded AK-47 at the back of my neck, but I couldn't do anything to the individual because of the restrictions imposed upon us because of the rules of engagement. If I'd been a British or a French soldier, that guy would have been dead, but I couldn't do anything.

I'm not making myself look good or anything, but we had, I think, 1,200 people from Canadian Forces Europe that were in there. We were the first unit into Yugoslavia, standing on our heads for six months, but there was no press on it. Anna Maria Tremonti was there once, when we got there the first week.

We were in Sarajevo. We were taking wounded on a daily basis when I was there. It was a combat zone. No Canadian press were there. Christiane Amanpour from CNN was there. Martin Bell from the BBC was there. There was no Canadian press. They were hiding back in Zagreb with their tails between their legs.

We have to do a better job of showing what the Canadian Forces are doing abroad.

As an example, an F-16 pilot was shot down a couple of years ago by a ground-to-air missile. He had to do the escape and evasion thing for a week, and the marines went in there, kicked ass, and got him out of there like they did. He was a national hero, shaking hands with Bill Clinton.

We had people going through that much stress and more on a daily basis. There was nothing.

We do a very poor job of representing our armed forces to our country.

On service couples, you've seen two or three very bad examples of what's happening now in the armed forces. With all my travels, I can tell you what the problem is. We're too small. Until 1992, when force reduction started on a major level, we had quite a few bases and stations open, but with the downsizing, the career managers lost the ability to be flexible and they lost their numbers. We've now been pushed into such a little vacuum that the flexibility to keep the quality of life for service people is gone.

Lloyd Axworthy keeps putting his hand up all the time to volunteer Canada for everything around the world, but we're not the Americans or the Brits or the French, who have real armed forces with hundreds of thousands of people. We don't have that. We're 60,000 people.

I have friends back in the engineer regiments who are on their fourth tour in Bosnia now. The unit that replaced us in Yugoslavia came out of Kuwait 11 months before. One CR did three UN tours in about two and a half years. Their social workers were burnt. They had divorces coming out their ears.

But the press doesn't see that. You don't see that. Just the lawyers see that. I've been through it. I know.

Regarding interprovincial accreditation, I'm a certified engineer and technician both in Nova Scotia and now here in Alberta. This is part of the Canadian unity problem. For some reason, as everybody knows, for postings, whether it's driver's licences or training degrees, every time we change provinces we have problems—kids with schooling.... That's wrong.

We're one country. We now have ten little fiefdoms putting up walls between us.

In Germany, when I was there on my first tour, we had eleven states in West Germany. Whether you worked in the Saarland up north or down south where I was, in Baden-Württemberg, or over in Bavaria, your accreditation was recognized anywhere in Germany.

Here we are fighting like kids in a sandbox. Oh no; that's from Ontario; that's not good enough. That's from P.E.I.; we don't recognize that.

That—pardon my Oxford English—is bullshit. We're one country, with one currency, and that's where you people can get a grip on things and get the people in charge to understand that our standards are pretty good across Canada, but it creates major problems for us when we move.

On Bill C-55, the Pension Benefits Division Act, in my marriage I had seven postings in fourteen years. A marriage can take only so much. She wanted a life. We wanted a house. All our friends had houses close to being paid for and we were going through three houses in five years, losing money with no way of recovering it.

• 2325

As a result I got separated, and because of Bill C-55, I have to pay her a large amount. She gets a cheque at the end of this month. She puts it right into her RRSP, and at the age of 55 that's worth over $150,000. I can't do that with my pension.

I'm just trying to make you understand that when you move people around a lot through political moves.... I was with 1 CEU in Winnipeg. We had a fine unit in Winnipeg, the construction engineering unit. Frank McKenna had Moncton and Chatham closed; “well, I need something in there.” So Jean Chrétien promised him 1 CEU. We were the volunteers, the sacrificial lambs.

We do construction all across Canada, all over the world with the embassies. It made sense to keep us in Winnipeg. We have a major international airport there. We have the six Hercules there from 435 Squadron to do all our work in the Arctic, as we were doing. Moncton's in the middle of nowhere for the type of job they do. One flight a day goes in there. Their construction costs and shipping costs and flying costs are off the scale. But as a political move it costs people you don't see and the press doesn't see.

One last thing that's come to my attention is going on in Yugoslavia. It probably won't be talked about, but I'm not afraid to bring it up.

As I mentioned, when I was in 4 CER, we were the first ones in there in 1992. We did a bang-up job. We came into a hot combat zone. We fixed up our camp. We had the best camp in the country when we left. We had a mess where you went to relax. After a long day lifting mines in the minefields, booby traps, getting guns stuck in the side of your head, you had a place to go and relax. If you wanted to have a few beer, you could have a few beer. Since Somalia, which has devastated the armed forces morale-wise, liquor in Bosnia is now treated as if it's crack cocaine. People aren't seeing that in the press. That's being kept very close to the units.

An individual by the name of Brigadier-General Jeffries, out of Petawawa, started the no-drinking policy because of Somalia. We became known as the “Kool-Aid Brigade”. The Brits and the Europeans were laughing at us. What he was saying with this policy—and he's now the commander of 1 Canadian Division in Kingston, I believe—was “I don't trust my men”.

Because of the slowness in promotions in the armed forces with downsizing, most of our corporals, through no fault of their own, are in their late 20s or early 30s. These are mature individuals. These aren't 18-year-old kids to be looked after.

We had a mess where you could go and relax after you were coming in from minefields or doing whatever. If you had six beer and went to bed, nobody cared. I saw one incident in six months where a charge was laid, and the RSM dealt with it as RSMs used to be able to deal with these problems. Now the RSMs are nothing more than bat-boys to the commanding officers in the field units, because the commanding officers are so afraid that if they get any black marks on their six-month tour it won't look good.

There are units coming back now—I have an example here that will stand out—where they are laying hundreds of charges against their people in six months. We had one charge in six months. Because of Somalia, the leadership is now being told by whoever in Ottawa, keep a 100% grip on your men for six months; you will look good; you will come out and the next people will go in.

There's a case where a brigade just came back from Edmonton. You were talking to them yesterday. They were there over Christmas-New Year's, away from their families, missing their kids and everything else. I believe the rule was two drinks per day or something, which is asinine; we're not 18 years old. I'm not trying to preach the morals, good or bad, of liquor. It's the policy and the way we're leading our people. Over 100 charges were laid at Christmas-New Year's for people who violated this rule.

There were cases where women were in the guys' shacks, but it was in the common areas. They weren't in the private rooms. They were just doing the Christmas-New Year's things that people away from their families do. They were charged between $1,000 and $1,200 each.

In Canada, or at least in Alberta, an impaired driver is charged around $650 or $700 on the first charge. That's right here in the Cold Lake Sun. Every week they publish what goes on in the local courthouse, which is good to see.

So we have people who are serving our country in a danger area and who are being charged $1,200 by the commanding officers for having one drink too many, or where on spot searches they are finding a bottle of liquor in their barrack box. That's wrong. That's very demoralizing.

That mentality is destroying the combat arms and anybody who is attached to them, because they are treating them as if they are boy scouts. They are saying they don't trust them.

• 2330

I challenge you to investigate that policy with Major General Jeffries. It's an LFC policy, but even in Haiti it was the same thing. There's no danger as such in Haiti to speak of, but Haiti was the same thing: they were watching the amount of liquor people drank, and if you exceeded it you were charged $1,000 and shipped out of the country.

We're adults. People need time to relax on these deployments. If they get in trouble in the unit, they've got regimental sergeant majors, like Chief Warrant Officer Scott, we've got MWOs; these people are veteran disciplinarians, and they'll close the door and deal with them. That's why we have Canadian Forces administration orders.

I'm just hoping that your report will see as much attention and action as the Somalia report did. We have a lot of fine people in the armed forces, and they're losing faith in the leadership of the military and those who pay the military. It's up to you people to correct that.

Thank you for your attention.

The Chairman: You had a question, Mr. Hanger?

Mr. Art Hanger: I'm very interested in this ruling and its enforcement of the alcohol policy. I gather that's what it's called, an alcohol policy.

Sgt Dale Lyne: I'm not sure of the name of it, but there is a directive. Somebody in LFC could tell you the directive and the policy. I've no doubt that it's in black and white somewhere. CDS, Chief of Defence Staff policy.

Mr. Art Hanger: A $1,200 fine?

Sgt Dale Lyne: Yes, a $1,200 fine. This is a common fine that's being levied now, a $1,200 fine. That's criminal. And they're being pushed: that's the way it is—you disobey the commanding officer's rules, the Chief of Defence Staff's rules, you take your lumps and don't do it again. They're being pushed where they're not supposed to grieve this. The average person in this room can't hire a lawyer. If that happened to me, I'd get a loan to hire a lawyer on something that stupid.

The bunch that came back, the hundred that were charged, were held back two weeks for all the charges that had been laid and processed. Their flight was nicknamed Con Air when they came back. They all had stickers on their baggage, Con Air. It's funny, but it's very sickening. We're getting laughed at over there because of this Mickey Mouse, candy-assed policy.

We have RSMs and commanding officers who can deal with this in a common sense policy, but it's now a broad-brush policy to keep your noses.... Obviously with a dangerous job or dangerous area, drugs and alcohol don't belong there. But you come home at night after a long week doing whatever, if you want to have two or three beers and relax and go to bed, that's fine. But now it's a very phoney atmosphere they're being forced to operate under.

Mr. Art Hanger: So in the mess soldiers can't sit around and have a bottle of beer?

A witness: Sir, I just came back from four months in Haiti. If you have more than two beers.... You have a little card and you get it stamped. If you go for a third, you lose your month's salary just like that.

Mr. Art Hanger: You lose a month's salary.

A witness: Yes. The UN benefits you get for a month, $1,200, gone—for a third beer. You could have all the point-five beer you want while you were there. So a lot of people were buying two point-five and two triple X and making four beer out of it, and that was fine. You leave most people alone, they have two or three beer and that's fine. But they're forced to say okay, you have two, that's fine. They're looking for a way to get their third beer.

Sgt Dale Lyne: We're not children. That's where this policy has to be taken on in public. I mean, impaired driving is $700, and somebody who has one drink too many is fined $1,200. People don't see that. It's the people in the armed forces who suffer for the policy of one individual and something that happened five years ago.

Somalia is over and done with. It was not the My Lai massacre like the Canadian press and CBC and Susan Harada made it into. It's over and done with.

As a final word, the airborne regiment should not have been disbanded.

The Chairman: Sergeant, I think we have one more question for you.

Mr. John Richardson: You're pretty quick on the retreat there.

Sgt Dale Lyne: I wonder why.

• 2335

Mr. John Richardson: I just wanted to pick up on a few things you mentioned here about the housing in Esquimalt versus the conditions of living. We were there. Our first stop was in Esquimalt, and we spent a long time looking at the situation. The situation at Esquimalt would be about ten times worse than your situation is here as far as housing is concerned.

Sgt Dale Lyne: I know that.

Mr. John Richardson: The windows won't close. We have situations where there haven't been any repairs for years. They have a nice site, but certainly the living conditions are not right. We have sailors sleeping on their ships rather than living in the PMQs.

Sgt Dale Lyne: If you're going to Halifax, I challenge you to go to Shannon Park.

Mr. John Richardson: I've seen it.

Sgt Dale Lyne: They're World War II. Have you been there? They're a disgrace. They're now 40% vacant because they're such poor quality.

I realize that Esquimalt is a very expensive retirement city to live in, but at least because of their navy lifestyle and their billeting, they can probably stay there most of their career and their family is more stable, even though they're doing their NATO tours.

Mr. John Richardson: I think that was the idea of going behind the big base concept for almost everyone. There would be less disturbance of the posting cycle. Maybe you could get four or five years on a base without being posted out all the time.

The point there is that faraway places always look better than where you are. So when you make some comparisons, this is about the nicest base I've seen in Canada. That would include my visitations to the American bases as well. This base, its infrastructure, its role, its sharp-end role.... It has a lot of high tech, a lot of committed people working here. Unfortunately, when things are bad—like we're trying to find out about the social part of the life in the forces—sometimes you get down and out and you magnify things, because when you're down and out that's just something you gaze on.

There are problems, lots of them. But we're hoping to pick up and run with it.

On the reserves, you mentioned the employer support group. I think it's headed up by John Craig Eaton—

Sgt Dale Lyne: Yes.

Mr. John Richardson: —but it was by Freddie Mannix first when I was involved with it. They have now 625 major companies in Canada signed up to give support to have the reserves released when required to serve their country and to see that the job is there when they come back.

Now, it's not as many as we'd like to have had with compulsory, but they asked us not to go compulsory because it would have put a lot of small businesses into it and they wouldn't hire reservists if they knew they had to comply with that. So this way they just went with the volunteer, and now the small people will take them on when they can. But rather than have part of the business community upset, you're better to go with the positive aspects—those who are prepared to do it—and carry with it.

I personally would have liked to have seen everyone go onside, as the Americans have; it would make it a lot easier. But Canadians aren't Americans, and that's not the way they do business.

Finally, General Kent Foster, who is an old friend of mine, is not with Health Canada any more.

Sgt Dale Lyne: But at the time of the news release he was there as the assistant deputy minister.

Mr. John Richardson: He was there for two and a half years as assistant deputy minister of health.

Sgt Dale Lyne: Regardless, my point was, sir, how did he get the $100,000 job and I can't apply for a $30,000 carpenter job?

Mr. John Richardson: I know, but the last time I knew, this is a free country and anybody can apply for a job.

Sgt Dale Lyne: No, not in the public service—no. We're barred from competitions. You check into it with PSAC and you'll find out.

Mr. John Richardson: Okay. Thank you.

The Chairman: Art, a very short question.

Mr. Art Hanger: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Sergeant, just going back to this Bosnia situation, I assume that it's only happening in Bosnia—or does it apply everywhere else?

Sgt Dale Lyne: It was in Haiti until Haiti closed in December.

Mr. Art Hanger: Okay.

A voice: It was in the gulf too, sir.

Mr. Art Hanger: As far back as the gulf? But does it apply locally as much?

Sgt Dale Lyne: No, it's just on operations.

Recently, even in the ice storm General Hillier, the brigade commander for Petawawa, was on the news where supposedly nine Petawawa CFB soldiers were found drinking and they were being charged and the news made a big thing of it. Susan Harada was there with a big fat mike in her mouth, shooting her mouth off like she always does. They were probably having a couple of beers after working a couple of 16-hour shifts. What's the problem?

• 2340

Mr. Art Hanger: Yes.

I would like to clarify one other point. This is more like an internal disciplinary measure, I would assume—

Sgt Dale Lyne: Yes.

Mr. Art Hanger: —and everything is handled right there by the commanding officer. He decides and levies the fine.

Sgt Dale Lyne: The chief could tell you more. I don't know what the policy is on that.

For fines, sir, who controls that?

Mr. Art Hanger: Would the commanding officer, in a disciplinary matter, handle the fine?

A voice:

[Editor's Note: Inaudible]

Sgt Dale Lyne: It's just that the principle is an insult to the people serving their country overseas, and we're getting laughed at because of it.

Mr. David Pratt: I'm intrigued by what you said in connection with the RSMs and their role and how it's changed. When did that happen? Have you any idea why it happened?

Sgt Dale Lyne: I was in the infantry. I started and I did six and a half years as a member of the Royal Canadian Regiment and wore the maroon beret of 190 parachute jumps. Back when I joined, in the 1970s, especially in Germany, if you screwed up the RSM or company sergeant-major took you out and thumped you against the wall. That was understood; it was done, it worked. Now we would be charged and we would be on the front page of Life and everything else.

The RSMs were strong. When I first joined, a lot of them were World War II or Korean War veterans. They would shed their blood for the country and they knew what discipline was all about. You respected those guys. Now there has been a power shift, especially since Somalia—this is my opinion only—and those are the people that have been there.... The RSMs do not have the power they used to have.

In most other countries, especially in the British armed forces, they're very powerful individuals. The COs are going to them all the time for advice.

Now they're almost shunted off to the side and the COs, in the army units at least, are not using RSMs as they should be used.

We had a case when we first got to Yugoslavia. Three young sappers broke the rules. Instead of charging them and taking all the money they didn't have out of their pockets, we had a bin for a pile of wood that had to be cut for the fires. Every time those guys came back after their days in the mine fields, they were doing two or three hours a night splitting and cutting wood until that wood pile was done. But they learned their lesson. They didn't grumble about it. They knew they were wrong. It was handled within the unit and we did not have this big bad blanket policy with the Chief of the Defence Staff telling the RSMs or COs how to fine their people.

Our people are experienced and they're good at using discipline if they have to, but because of Somalia the power has been taken away.

Mr. David Pratt: So in many respects what you're talking about, if you want to put it together in a concept, is a sort of re-empowerment—

Sgt Dale Lyne: Yes, sir.

Mr. David Pratt: —in terms of...well, I guess a lot of things really—-

Sgt Dale Lyne: Yes.

Mr. David Pratt: —-for the administration of units.

Sgt Dale Lyne: The units have the facilities and the people to do it; we're just handcuffing them with a lot of political correctness in doing their jobs.

The Chairman: I think it's safe to go sit down now.

Master Corporal Mark Browning.

Master Corporal Mark Browning (Individual Presentation): How do I compete with a speech like that?

My topic of discussion is our taskings.

I presented you with a brief that was compiled back in the early 1980s by the commanding officer of CFS Alert. For those of you who don't know, CFS Alert is Canada's northernmost permanently inhabited community. In the world there's nothing further north.

What we have done in the past 50 years is send our personnel on six-month tours of Alert with absolutely no break.

Our personnel are being posted to stations like Cold Lake, which are already semi-isolated. I'm expected to come here with my family and leave my family in semi-isolation while I head off for a six-month tour in total isolation with no benefits.

The Department of the Environment has personnel in Alert right now. They are there 365 days of the year; however, they rotate out every three months.

We have service flights in and out of Alert every week from Trenton. We have personnel all across the country that are capable of doing the same job as I do in Alert. I fail to understand why even after we have briefs that are compiled by lieutenant-colonels and psychologists, with references to personnel being semi-isolated or isolated all over the country, we cannot come up with an arrangement where we can rotate people in and out of Alert within a three-month rotation.

• 2345

The second point of my conversation is pay benefits for these isolated postings. When we go to Alert our total benefit...if you are married, you will get a $344 isolation benefit per month, less tax. Then you will receive, if you are married, another $120 a month; but only if you're married.

This comes to a total benefit of $464. After your taxes are taken off that, you wind up with approximately $310. This total amount is then added to your income tax at the end of the year. That bumps your pay into the next tax bracket, and you pay again.

When personnel proceed on tours outside Canada, for example in Bosnia and Haiti, the benefits are numerous. I called the pay office this morning. The biggest benefit, depending on your number of tours out of country...if you're just starting on your first tour, the Bosnia pay is a $900 tax-free benefit per month.

Along with that you're given a two-week United Nations leave benefit, where you can take a leave travel allowance, which is paid for, to bring you back to your family, or you can take what is called a “reverse leave travel allowance” and bring your wife to meet you overseas in one of the UN leave areas.

You are also entitled to one three-day pass within the local area. Unfortunately, a three-day pass in Alert really wouldn't do you much good. There's nowhere to go, ladies and gentlemen. We're stuck. My question to you is why are we stuck?

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Corporal Derek Chopowick.

Corporal Derek Chopowick (Individual Presentation): Good evening. Thank you for coming.

I just wanted to answer some of the questions you had about the scanning process. When I joined, a long time ago, I was in the nuclear weapons program, so I was continually under a scanning process. To go to Cold Lake it was just a two-stage physical. To go to Germany was a two-stage physical and a visit with a social worker. If you failed any part of that, you didn't go to Germany.

To come back from Germany, the career manager, who is the rusty link in that big, long chain of things that happen, said it didn't matter if you failed your screening, you were going to Cold Lake. I said that was not a big problem with me; I wanted to come here anyway.

Maybe that satisfies some of the question about coming to Cold Lake. It didn't matter if you passed your screening or not, you were destined for Cold Lake.

I'm a product of a bit of ASD, alternate service delivery, because I got my electronics training at the Saskatchewan Technical Institute compliments of the military. So I have a certificate that actually means something. It's not like the little certificates they issue us and you later put on the roller in your bathroom because you can't get anything with them from the military.

You've been to the school here. You've seen the training hangar and the training aids and you've seen the computers. Did you see what is inside the computers? Most of that stuff is five or ten years out of date. When I took my course in there two years ago, I gave them eight pages of discrepancies between the actual manuals we used at work and what they were teaching us in the school. Just three months ago someone else who went through there said the discrepancies are still there.

What I would like to see is that the school is taken over by a competent technical institution such as NAIT. Therefore we would be given the utmost and newest technological training and then any certificates issued would be valid on the outside. That's just one concern I have.

• 2350

Not all ASD is bad. For instance, in two bases east—I believe they are Trenton and Shearwater—they have a dedicated facility for washing airplanes that is run by civilians.

We have a human resource crisis on the flight line. We are at a bare minimum of people that carry out our operations.

When the barrack warden needs some furniture moved, I would really like to see them not come and take me away from fuelling or arming an airplane to go and do that. When he wants some furniture moved, he should be able to phone Atlas Van Lines and have them do the job. That's just one of the things that really peeves me.

One of the main concerns here was the ASD thing and why a lot of the units don't like to go ASD. I can understand why with the heavy military stuff. Not only do you lose those positions of very qualified people, but there will be that many fewer people to pay mess dues, that many fewer people to go and do BDF. All of a sudden everybody else's taskings just get larger and larger and larger.

I'm very proud of what I do. And I'm very good at what I do, at least in my own mind.

Every time something comes up where we say the workload is getting too big, well, that's when the upper officers tell us to stop. Well, we can't just stop. We have to go and take risks. We have to go and work harder, because, yes, we're here eight, nine, or ten hours a day anyway, but if we don't meet the mission we're in here on the weekends. And nobody wants to work the weekends.

If we stop and we don't take those shortcuts or take those risks or risk those injuries, we're in on the weekend.

We spend 35 or 40 hours a week, maybe more or maybe less, depending on the flight schedule or whatever. We're in there. And then we get this: well, if you don't like it, get out, or, you can be replaced by a civvy. Well, no civvy will do what I do for $39 and change.

We started this amalgamation and reorganization to sort of bring us on line with the corporate society. To me that just means that the bean counters have taken over.

Equipment isn't being put in for bench stock. If it breaks, you have to order it. You don't have one or two spares that you can use right away. If you take a broken component out, ship it back and it comes back as a bench stock again.... We don't have that any more. We have empty shelves now. We have to order new parts or steal from other airplanes just to keep that going.

We keep hearing that it's the corporate society. I don't know what corporate model they're basing it on where the boss is the customer, is the administrator, is the disciplinarian, is everything.

If they want to talk corporate, let's get corporate. Let's invite the brotherhoods in. Let's get our shop people unionized, and then maybe we can get some collective bargaining going and get the wages up equal to what the guy who kicks the tires and pumps the fuel at Air Canada and CP Air is getting. I do a lot more than that and I do it for a lot less, and I'd like to see some equalization in that.

Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Corporal Garry Goodspeed.

• 2355

Corporal Garry Goodspeed (Individual Presentation): As far as the no drinking policy goes, friends of mine in the field are telling me that it also applies to the training area in Wainwright. The training area in Wainwright is off limits for all alcohol consumption. So I guess they're first going to train them not to drink and then they're going to send them across the ocean to do so.

That's just further to what the sergeant was saying.

Chief Warrant Officer Scott, I'd like to thank you personally for what you said today. On behalf of myself and my peers, we really want to thank you for everything you said today, sir.

The only thing I want to bring up right now that I haven't heard of today—and forgive me if I missed some of the speakers today—is that the people of the panel speaking up here, the lady and gentlemen up here, are not the only people who are representing our country who have to work on a daily basis with separatists. As a proud Canadian and a proud Canadian soldier, unfortunately I have to spend some of my time in uniform working alongside people who feel they'd be better served representing their own little world that they live in.

I want to know from each of you what you think you can do, or what we can do together, about separatists that are wearing Canadian uniforms in the Canadian military.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Corporal, if I could just have you come back up, please, I'd like you to elaborate a little bit on what you're saying here. Are you saying there's a problem in terms of the way the military might operate because of separatists in the military? What exactly are you saying?

Cpl Garry Goodspeed: I've been in Cold Lake for two years, and fortunately, being so far west, I haven't had the misfortune of actually dealing with any. But after spending four years in Ottawa and after attempting to attend the parade in Montreal on October 27, 1995, I believe it was, the experiences that I had to endure dealing with everything from senior NCOs to officers who felt the same way as many of our misguided politicians really frustrated me, to say the least.

Mr. Leon Benoit: So are you saying that there were and are separatists in the military who, if it comes down to it, would support Quebec rather than the Canadian military?

Cpl Garry Goodspeed: I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that there are many members of the Canadian military who strongly support the separatist option. I strongly believe that, sir.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Have you heard people in the military actually say—

Cpl Garry Goodspeed: Yes.

Mr. Leon Benoit: —that, if it came down to it, they would abandon the Canadian military, that their allegiance is to Quebec if Quebec chooses to separate?

Cpl Garry Goodspeed: Maybe not in those words, sir. But when there's a referendum happening and people are standing in uniform saying that they support this and they're hoping that things will follow through.... They haven't necessarily laid out their personal platforms, but they make their case well known and it's tolerated. It's not necessarily encouraged—definitely not encouraged—but it seems to be treated with kid gloves.

I fully respect the democratic process in this country. It's the best country in the world, and if we're going to have separatists in Parliament, so be it. These people were democratically elected. But when people are in uniform, sir....

They are there; I challenge people here to deny it. Maybe out here in Alberta we don't see it. I spent seven years in Calgary and I saw very little of it. But spend some time in Ottawa or spend some time in the field with the Van Doos and I can guarantee you, sir, you will see it.

Mr. Leon Benoit: This is a rhetorical question, I guess, but how on earth can we have a military that we can count on if we have people in the military who don't hold an allegiance to Canada? Again, I don't expect you to answer that. It's a rhetorical question.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Captain Dan Constable.

• 0000

Captain Dan Constable (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, honourable members of the panel, Colonel Guidinger, and fellow members of this forum, before I begin I'd just like to congratulate what I see as a very strong foundation of our NCMs who are willing to stand up and put a little bit on the line and be heard. As an officer of the military, that makes me very proud.

As well I'd like to point out that I'm very proud to say that the tremendous amount of jet noise that we heard disturbing this meeting was probably coming from the aircraft of my squadron, because as we speak squadron mates of mine are hurling their pink bodies at about 500 knots in a $40-million aircraft at the ground at night to train in the new night attack role at 441 and 4 Wing that the Canadian Armed Forces has tasked us to do. So we are moving ahead in new roles. We are taking on new responsibilities. I think that's important to put forward in a meeting such as this.

I only hope there will be a lot more of this noise, known affectionately by the serving members as the sound of freedom and by the community members as the sound of noise.

I hope it serves as a reminder of why we're here. I believe we are all here ultimately, at 4 Wing anyway, and yourselves, to attempt to heal a system that's designed through its operational or support function to ensure that Canada can deploy the best-trained air crews and best-maintained aircraft in the free world.

I'd like to discuss three main issues that I believe encompass some of the woes within the CF. In my opinion they are the differences between the CF and civilian life, quality of life and, ultimately, pay. We've touched on a lot of the differences between a military member and a civilian today, and I probably can't bring out too many new ones.

There's not much difference at the surface. We're basically Canadian citizens. We were civilians before. We're civilians in uniforms now, I believe, and we will become civilians later on in life. But for a good portion of our lives we have elected to proudly serve our country, and herein lies the difference. We've agreed on behalf of our country possibly to lay down our lives in the defence of Canada's freedom.

What are the differences? I'd ask a few questions.

Does a civilian do isolated postings to Alert for six months with no leave and no extra pay to speak of?

Does a civilian spouse resign himself or herself to never having the chance for a real career due to isolated or semi-isolated postings that occur every two to eight years?

Do the civilians do much of putting up with things like discrimination? They're told they can't get promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel now because of the official bilingual policy in this country.

Does the average civilian walk through mine fields, go off every day and shoot rockets, fire bombs, come within 1,000 feet at usually about 1,000 knots of closure in an air combat manoeuvring range?

I don't think the average civilian goes through those kinds of things.

As far as quality of life is concerned, there are two issues here: the quality of the people and the quality of the life.

On the quality of the people, basically my view is that you get the quality you pay for. We've become the U.S. military from the sixties and seventies. It's well documented that they did lose and we have lost sight of good leadership practices, the most fundamental of which is looking after our people. This does not start at the top of NDHQ with the CDS or anyone else in the military. I believe it starts with the politicians and the people of Canada.

You as the elected representatives and the Canadian people need to show resolve that the CF matters to Canada. Basically, if we're going to do the job, let's do it correctly.

One of the major ways to do this is to provide enough funding to give us the capital resources to do our jobs successfully to the extremely high professional state and standard of which we are capable. But good equipment means nothing without good people, and the bottom line is that if you want good-quality people you must pay them what they're worth.

• 0005

Quality of life: I'll keep it simple. It's different for everybody. The quality of life that I may be searching for is going to be completely different from the quality of life that Sergeant X or Corporal Y is looking for. My bottom line on that is, you give us the money and we will make our own quality of life. Don't try to do it for us.

As far as pay goes, we're attempting all the time to run the military as a business. I think that's a losing venture, because the military does not have a commodity to sell, other than its people in times of need. It's not a money-making venture. It will always be in the hole. However, if we're going to attempt to be good fiscal managers—and I think that's important—then I believe there are certain things we can do to help the process out.

One that we've talked about, and the NCMs are quite concerned about, is lateral pay. How can we tell people on the one hand, “I'm sorry, your pay is through your promotions, but guess what, promotions are all frozen, ergo you are not getting paid any more”? That applies across the board. If we recognize that someone is a captain or a corporal doing the next level job up, why is it not possible for our military pay people to start paying the person who's filling the next shoes up a little more money for what he's doing? He's taking on extra responsibility. He's looking after people. He's probably gone from a position of not writing any PERs to writing them. There are all those extra responsibilities. He's probably working an extra hour or two a day, which puts stress on his family life.

I'll throw that out.

I hope to be considered a little courageous for bringing up the next issue under the realm of pay. It is a little selfish, but I'm representing a small brotherhood, the pilots. I know it's a very tenuous issue, because the pilots in the military are being scrutinized. There is a move afoot to see about solving the pilot crisis, and I would offer that it is a crisis that will affect the operational capability of the Canadian Forces.

Why is the air force here? The air force is here ultimately to put aircraft into the air, and air crew, at this technological state, must fly those airplanes. They're a very valued commodity, most of them, and I would argue that the vast majority of them are extremely highly skilled, educated people, and are well worth a lot more than what we are paying them.

We have no unions in the military. We have no way to vote anything else in. We've done what we believe is the best we can to make our concerns known. The only way we can make those concerns known is to vote with our feet, and that is what is happening. People are fed up with 16-hour days, working weekends, deployments away, losing their spouses, losing their connection with their family, and they are voting with their feet. They're letting you know by telling you that Air Canada is willing to pay us what we're worth and we're going to go. I'm sure that no one in this room can look at that and not find rationale in it.

I'd like to clear up a few things. One that was especially talked about today is that the military is looking into the possibility of giving pilots a bonus. Just for the record, I'd like it known to a lot of the people who are here in this forum who are concerned about this issue that at least here at 4 Wing the idea of a bonus is looked at very unfavourably by most of the air crew. The reason for that is because that bonus is targeted specifically for two reasons: one is to try to encourage the roughly 8- to 15-year captain who has received millions of dollars worth of training, who is going to take that training elsewhere.... They're saying, let's not lose this money; let's pay this guy just a little bit extra to try to keep him in.

The problem is that we end up with a situation where anyone beyond 15 years—who has dedicated their entire career to this outfit and is probably at the rank of major or lieutenant colonel, and I would argue probably the rank of colonel—looks down and realizes, “Hmm, isn't that very nice; the 9- to 15-year captain is probably going to make more than I am.” I think that's a terribly sad situation. I think the reason our politicians are opting for that kind of solution is that they see it as a quick term, easy fix, that they can throw money at the problem now and turn around and withdraw it later when the airline stops hiring.

• 0010

My argument is that if you want leadership to lead this country, and we have seen through Somalia and many numbers...and you've seen it all throughout the day. The people down below are screaming for good leaders. The fact of the matter is that for those leaders within the air force, and especially within the fighter force, if you want them to be of good quality, you'll have to pay them to stay in and pay them for what they're worth; you'll have to pay them to be responsible and then hold them accountable.

I see it as a very poor option for us to pay our pilots...I think the solution has to be to give more pay across the board to everybody. Pilots are another problem within the system, and we're going to have to solve this problem. However, the solution is not temporary band-aid fixes, it's not fingers in the dyke; let's stop this permanently. Let's show that it's a viable career, and that if you join this career, you are not going to become the wonderful wing commander of 4 Wing Cold Lake and find out that they're thinking about paying your captains more than you.

What's the incentive for me as a captain to think, gee, I really want to be in that man's shoes one day? No, thank you, I'll take my talents elsewhere, where I know I'll get paid for them and where I know that the people above me who are more talented, more educated, which is something I can strive for, are making a better wage.

There are many more issues I would love to take up your time with. You've been very gracious to listen to all of us. I hope that one day we can continue the discussion. Thank you very much.

Mr. Art Hanger: Captain, I'm curious about one statement you made—a point of, if you want to call it that, discrimination and the official bilingual policy as it relates to promotion. Where does it stop and where does it start?

Capt Dan Constable: I suppose the other side of the argument is whether it is really discrimination, because the francophone officer is under the same discrimination. He has to become bilingual as well. So is it really discrimination?

Well, technically at the outset you could say no. However, given the reality of the real world, which is something that a lot of times gets forgotten.... I am a perfect example. I have spent 17 years in the military, and most of that has been in English-speaking units. I've attempted to keep my French profile up; however, I know that despite the fact that I'm a military college graduate with a degree and other qualifications, the simple fact of the matter is that if it works out that I do come to the time when I could promoted to lieutenant-colonel or be considered for commanding officer of a flying unit, I don't have that opportunity unless I speak French.

Mr. Art Hanger: Just to carry it another step further regarding promotion, how would you evaluate the concept of merit when it comes to the bilingual policy? Do the two come together in a satisfactory fashion?

Capt Dan Constable: If I understand your question, sir, you're asking me if I think a bilingual officer makes a better leader.

Mr. Art Hanger: No, does it supersede this whole concept of merit, the fact that you are bilingual or are not, one or the other?

Capt Dan Constable: In many cases yes. I don't have the statistics at my fingertips and I do believe that question probably would be better answered by someone who could give you specific figures. If you're asking my personal opinion, I do believe.... Let's put it this way. I have heard stories in which people believe they have been passed over for promotions based on the fact that there was someone who was bilingual, or in which a francophone was passed over by an anglophone or vice versa because of the language issues.

• 0015

Mr. Art Hanger: The only reason I pursue it is I've heard the statement before. I noticed other heads nodding at your statement earlier, so obviously your viewpoint is shared by others. I just wanted to clarify it, and I appreciate your candid comments.

Capt Dan Constable: Sir, I realize I've said my piece. I had many issues to speak of, but one I didn't discuss was.... You've heard hard-luck stories throughout and I just thought I'd throw out a personal one because of things like pay. They've talked about making a business case, and I'm not sure how high up it is.... One of the other things is that as far as a business case goes, it's a well-known fact—at least among the aircrew community—that basically if you stop four to five pilots from getting out of the military by paying them what they're worth, you've probably saved the money right there to make an across-the-board payment. I am convinced that of the 250 pilots we are short right now—if you add up the millions upon millions of dollars that Canada has thrown away by creating a situation where those people get out, you've probably saved right there the amount of money you could give an across-the-board pay raise to the Canadian Forces. In other words, I believe we are throwing money down the drain.

The last comment I have based on pay is a personal one. I haven't been a pilot my whole career. I cross-trained over from a different trade into the pilot occupation, and when I did that I was at a certain pay incentive category. Having cross-trained over to pilot...the pilots' base pay is slightly higher, so I started to receive the equivalent of the pay that was for my time in rank. In other words, I was a five-year captain when I cross-trained over, so I started receiving a five-year captain's salary and the increments went up. Then our increments were frozen. After three years of receiving this pay, they came back to me one January 1st and said, by the way, we've been paying you two incentive pay categories higher than what you are entitled to and you owe us $11,000.

The Canadian Forces Administrative Orders actually have the fine print that details this. It is in no way clear. I made some initial inquiries and found out that what had happened was that one of the captains who cross-trained over from navigator to pilot went back...when he got his wings he tried to apply for the same benefits that everyone else was getting, and they said, oh no, the rules state that you shouldn't be at that category. They went back and found out that they'd been doing this for 10 or 15 years. They started going back and recouping all this money from the captains. The captains started complaining about it and nothing was done—absolutely nothing was done. In fact, I had officers senior to myself state that they would prefer not to help me in my case because they were in the same position as me and didn't want to highlight themselves.

Finally, the lieutenant colonels, colonels, and a couple of retired senior officers of the military started to realize what was going on and were getting dinged themselves. There was a cessation in the payback of this program. Right now I currently have $4,000 sitting in limbo, with the possibility of still having to pay the money back. For three years there has been no movement by anybody to solve this problem, despite assurances that every six months it's going before Treasury Board and the problem will be resolved.

So there's a specific example. I don't mean to dump it on you. I don't expect this forum to do a whole lot about it. However, if you want to know things that piss off the average guy who seems to be working pretty hard, there's a perfect example.

I could probably go on. I've got notes from corporals and sergeants that are full of details like this.

Mr. Art Hanger: How many personnel would that payback affect, sir?

Capt Dan Constable: Don't quote me on the numbers, but I think it's between 45 and 70 of various ranks, from captain.... There's one captain I know who, at the time they tried to claw back the $22,000 he owed, was the executive assistant to the wing commander in Trenton.

• 0020

Basically, if you don't know about the military structure and the way it works, incentive pay categories—and I have a direction that was sent out directly and signed by the CDS—are given for time and rank. My belief is that these policies are unjust, in that they state that despite the fact that you are a five-year captain with all that experience, as soon as you cross-train over to pilot we're going to pay you not the equivalent of a five-year captain, because all that experience you've had before then, your degree and everything you have is thrown out the window. You just have to only be worth two pay category incentives below what you were before.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Corporal Kirk Harrison.

Corporal Kirk Harrison (Individual Presentation): Thank you for coming out, gentlemen.

I've been in the military for 15 years. I spent two and a half years in training systems getting my trade, which was a communications and radar systems technician. I've now been part of the trade restructure and I'm now an ADS tech. There was no extra pay granted for being an ADS tech, nor was there extra pay for being a CRS tech. It's just a spec-one trade: we work on the airplane. That's fine; I expect that.

My first posting was to Shearwater. I spent time on the boats. I have two weeks short of five years at sea. I spent more time as an air force technician on the boats than some hard navy trades, which was a lot of fun. It's very hard on the family if you happen to be married. My own experience was that in 1989 I went from Shearwater to Victoria, and in the next two years I spent 42 days in Canada. I was single; it wasn't that hard.

Now I'm here in Cold Lake. I was offered a choice in my posting, either Bagotville or Cold Lake. I took Cold Lake because I don't speak French. It has been good. This base is probably the best one I've been on for its facilities for people, and the wing commander has been very good in upgrading the way people are treated here. The 410 Squadron is a very good squadron. We do a lot of work there, perhaps more than is necessary, but it's the training squadron. It's where everyone goes. All the pilots are trained there on the F-18. It can be a very busy place.

The treatment of people in 4 Wing has been on the way up, and I would hope it continues. Families are still finding it difficult here. Our pay is a little low, compared to what you can get as a civilian. One of the fixes for that might be to fix CANEX. If you go by the American base exchanges, you get some good prices; if you go to a CANEX you're pretty much going to expect to pay a little more than going downtown. I'm not sure why this is, but that's the way it is.

Another thing might be to just lower the taxes that we pay. That's a little difficult, but the American military personnel have some incentives. One of the things they do is allow you a low-interest loan if you want to buy a house. I don't see that happening for us, but it would be nice.

Aside from that, I'm looking forward to my retirement in five years, when I'll be going into the civilian force. Unless things change, that's the way it's going to be.

I'm happy to see you coming out and at least listening to us. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

• 0025

That was our last presenter. I just wanted to thank everyone for coming out and giving us your views and to thank you for your patience. Some of you have been here since this afternoon. It has been a very long day for us. We wish to again on behalf of the committee thank you for helping us out with our report. I guess that's about it. Thank you.

The meeting is adjourned.