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]

Tuesday, February 10, 1998

• 1829

[Translation]

The Chairman (Mr. Robert Bertrand (Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, Lib..)): Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to our hearings. I'm sure there's no need for me to explain to you in detail why we are here. I would like to start by asking each member here today to introduce himself or herself, following which I will explain how tonight's proceedings will unfold.

• 1830

Let me start by introducing myself. My name is Robert Bertrand, and I am the Chairman of the committee.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, BQ): My name is Pierrette Venne and I am the national defence critic for the Bloc Québécois. I represent the riding of Saint Bruno —St. Hubert. Good evening.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit (Lakeland, Ref.): I am Leon Benoit, member of Parliament for Lakeland constituency in eastern central Alberta. I'm the Reform deputy defence critic.

Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby—Ajax, Lib.): I'm Judi Longfield, member of Parliament for the Ontario riding of Whitby—Ajax, which is just east of metropolitan Toronto. I'm a Liberal.

Mr. David Pratt (Nepean—Carleton, Lib.): I'm David Pratt. I'm a Liberal member of Parliament as well, from the riding of Nepean—Carleton, just outside of Ottawa.

[Translation]

The Chairman: We will be sitting this evening until 9 p.m. and we will resume our proceedings tomorrow morning at 8 a.m. I urge those who will be unable to make their presentations tomorrow morning to give their names to Eric.

I have here the list of witnesses. Kindly limit yourselves to about 10 minutes so that we can hear from as many witnesses as possible.

Without further ado, I call upon Colonel Marcotte to begin his presentation.

Colonel Benoît Marcotte (Third Wing Commander, CFB Bagotville): Mr. Bertrand, distinguished members of the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs, members of the military stationed in Bagotville, spouses of Third Wing personnel, ladies and gentlemen, I had the opportunity to meet with the members of your committee this afternoon and to make an initial presentation about the Third Wing and its mission.

I gave a brief overview of who we are, of our mission, and of the human and material resources at our disposal in Bagotville to carry out this mission, as well as an overview of the region and our importance to it. We hope that this will give you a better understanding of the situation and put into some perspective what you will be hearing tonight from the residents of Bagotville. Thank you once again for taking the time to come to Bagotville to hear our concerns.

I expect that you will hear people talk about many of the concerns that have already been brought to your attention when you visited other Canadian Forces bases. Our problems here in Bagotville are not that different from those experienced by people on other bases. Skyrocketing living costs, as discussed by witnesses in Esquimalt, are not as serious a problem in Bagotville, although members stationed here do experience some financial problems as well.

The fact that the members of our military are chronically underpaid will no doubt be brought up in many presentations. This situation has led many of our members to lose confidence in our government and in its ability to compensate its military adequately for its expertise and for the difficult working conditions it must endure. A host of problems is associated with these very low rates of pay. The most obvious problem is the premature rate of attrition and the fact that the private sector seeks out our disillusioned members who are looking for a fair and equitable salary. I'm losing highly qualified technicians who go looking for better pay in the aircraft industry in Montreal.

• 1835

Last year, I had some technicians who are specialized in complex materials such as aircraft structures who could find jobs that paid as much in body shops in the city. However, the most frustrating thing of all is the loss of my CF-18 pilots who leave to work for the airline companies. There should be 23 pilots per squadron, but in the past two years, we have not been able to fill all of the positions; we have to manage with 20 or 21 pilots per CF-18 squadron.

Two months ago, we expected to have 21 pilots per squadron by the summer of 1998, including new recruits. In recent weeks, the voluntary departure of seven pilots has been announced. The positions will quite simply not be filled, because we no longer have any reserve pilots and any hope we might have of building up strong squadrons to carry out the missions that our government might assign to us is gradually fading. Furthermore, the risks we face are increasing because we are losing senior pilots, the ones in charge of supervising and training the younger ones.

Other salary related problems, such as financial worries and the resulting stress on the family unit, will likely be brought up during the course of the presentations.

I suspect that the second major problem identified by our people will be having to deal with being uprooted. The moves imposed on our military create a host of problems. Families are separated for all kinds of reasons: financial and educational concerns, unacceptable loss of employment by the spouse, problems selling a home, language, etc. Those who choose to move their entire family are confronted with other problems associated with uprooting and relocating the family unit. These include difficulty adapting to a new school, the lack of job opportunities, among other things because of the high rate of unemployment in the region, the difficulty for English-speaking couples to adapt to a French-speaking environment and in particular to find a job.

For Canadian families in the 1990s, the loss of the second family income has very serious consequences. Our military personnel is forced to accept these circumstances. Of course, the problem is even more complex for single-parent families who are forced to move frequently.

If no one else alludes to the sacrifices that we have to make when we leave behind our children when they are 16 years old, simply because it would not be compassionate of us to ask them to change schools in their final years of high school, I could discuss that further later on, because my wife Carol and I have experienced this with our two children in the past two years.

The third problem that will most likely be mentioned will be the workload which has not decreased, even though the size of the Canadian forces has shrunk by over 20,000 in recent years. On the contrary, the workload has increased. Deployments are more demanding now than in 1993. Many of our members have been assigned to a number of UN and NATO peacekeeping missions.

Daily stress levels are increasing. In addition to asking more of our members in order to achieve objectives, we are reorganizing our tasks and demanding that personnel to take on more responsibilities, without making any plans to pay them more for their new skills. They are simply being asked to do more for the same rate of pay. Won't these more qualified employees look more attractive to the private sector which will be prepared to pay them slightly more based on their skills level?

In the meantime, we face threats from all sides of being replaced by private companies that would do the work better. We manage to maintain normal working days for our young military personnel, but I know for a fact that the number of hours spent in the workplace each day increases considerably along with rank. My sergeants, warrant officers, master warrant officers and chief warrant officers must constantly perform outside their normal working hours. They do so out of pride for and interest in their subordinates, but they are not paid for this extra work. In many cases, they put in these extra hours at the expense of their families.

This begins when a member reaches the rank of captain and it goes downhill quickly for majors and lieutenant-colonels. Is this normal? I don't believe so. This extra stress further highlights the exodus of those who have had enough. The end result is family problems, sick leave, and unfortunately, occasional incidents of spousal abuse. Several of our psychosocial, financial and medical experts will undoubtedly be relating to you some of the experiences that they have had in the past several months.

You will likely hear about the impact of the budget cuts on services that our personnel previously relied upon. Even though our people are our most valuable resource, lack of funding year after year has forced us to gradually cut those services that compensated to some extent for the sacrifices of military life.

• 1840

These cuts are also affecting the resources we have to carry out our missions. We are able to buy less equipment and fewer vehicles and to do less preventive maintenance on equipment and buildings. Our infrastructure is slowly crumbling.

Finally, it would come as no surprise to me if the personnel from Bagotville talked about the negative impact of the national sullying of the military's reputation by the media in recent years as a result of the unfortunate incidents in Somalia which have affected the self-esteem of our military personnel.

The military profession demands personal qualifications not found in any other profession, and the lack of public recognition of our profession has led our people to ask themselves if Canada and Canadians truly appreciate their unqualified commitment.

It is truly unfortunate that we tend to praise the work of our military only after they have been called upon to help out in disasters such as the ones that struck the Saguenay region in 1996 and the Winnipeg area last spring or during last month's ice storm.

Many Canadians think that our military personnel were paid overtime for services performed during these operations. Is this not one indication that people believe our military personnel, like other Canadians, work an 8-to-4 schedule? What evidence is there that Canada still values its armed forces and all that they represent?

Does Canada still want people who are committed, disciplined, trained and ready to intervene as a last resort when things aren't going well? The signals that the military has been getting since 1990 would point to the contrary, and the unfortunate exodus of highly talented individuals is evidence that our people no longer hold their profession in such high esteem.

As Third Wing Commander, I think that this is what you are going to hear over the course of the next few meetings. Perhaps I'm mistaken, since my comments are not based on discussions that I have had with the people here this evening, that is those who are planning to speak, but rather on my own current personal view of events in these early months of 1998.

We informed our personnel that they were completely at liberty to criticize any aspect of their job, without fear of reprisal. They are free to discuss any subject related to your mandate, and I invite them to do so either this evening or tomorrow morning. I do hope, however, that you will not be left with a totally negative perception of things, because here in Bagotville, we do everything we can to ensure that our personnel enjoy the best possible quality of life.

My predecessors made every possible effort to ensure that personnel support infrastructures were modernized and upgraded. Despite our more limited resources today, we are continuing these efforts and attempting to balance our resources against operational requirements and to improve the quality of life of our most valuable resource, that is our personnel.

The opening of the first multi-service center here in Bagotville in 1990 helped us tremendously to identify and meet the needs of our people. You visited the center and met with some of its employees this afternoon. I want to take the opportunity this evening to congratulate them on the excellent work they are doing in our community. Without them and without the military and civilian personnel, including the credit union staff who work closely with our employees, the unease that we are feeling today would have far more drastic consequences.

As Commander, I'm privileged to have such a strong team of individuals dedicated to preventing psychosocial problems, to identifying other obvious problems and to finding effective solutions as quickly as possible, where necessary.

Thank you for your attention. With your permission, I would like to be called back as the last witness tomorrow morning to close these proceedings. Please feel free to call on me to clarify any point or answer any question during the hearings.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Colonel. Kindly give a copy of your presentation to the clerk.

We will now proceed to questions. Mr. Benoît.

[English]

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

Good evening, Colonel, and thank you for your presentation. Many of the points you brought up certainly are issues that have been brought to our attention before, but could you pick perhaps two issues that upon reflection would best express the greatest concerns facing the people on your base?

• 1845

Col. Benoît Marcotte: I think a dominant concern is that the salaries are still low. I think the uprooting of personnel from point A to point B in today's society is probably another dominant problem. I may be corrected by the interventions we're going to have tonight and tomorrow, but I feel that's probably one of the strongest concerns and the one that creates a lot of heartache.

Accumulating stress at work based on everything that is happening to the military is also something that's creating concern and more pressure. The combination of low salaries, uprooting and the problems associated with it, and an increasing workload is increasing stress at work to the point where people are choosing to leave the service. We see that happening in Bagotville and you're seeing it happening in other bases.

Mr. Leon Benoit: On the first concern about low salaries, we know how that can be dealt with.

On the second concern, as base commander what recommendations for change have you made or would you make to deal with some of these problems of families being pulled apart, in some cases seemingly unnecessarily?

Col. Benoît Marcotte: Some of the problems will probably persist as long as we uproot and move families. I think some of the activities undertaken in Ottawa to lengthen the posting tour will probably help decrease the problems.

The education system, which is different from one province to the next, is a problem I don't have any immediate solution for, unless we have a military schooling system, as we did when we were in Europe. We had a Canadian school for our personnel who were living on stations in Europe. That permitted our students to grow in one school system. That's not possible between Quebec and Ontario and the other provinces right now at the high school level. It's always a problem for some of our children.

As far as finding other solutions, we're trying. Maybe one of the solutions would be found in better compensation so that when people are uprooted a portion of their salaries accounts for that uprooting and the upheaval it creates. That's not the case right now.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chairman: Madame Venne.

[Translation]

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Colonel, you would like some indication that the public values our armed forces. Each person has a job to do. I've spoken to some of your military personnel. I know that they are not very fond of the media and they have good reason for feeling this way. Let me recount something that happened during the ice storm when the men were out there working very hard, particularly in the Saint- Hubert, Saint-Bruno and Saint-Hyacinthe areas. One report told of how strip clubs were busier than usual because of the presence of armed forces personnel in the region. I found that report deplorable, but what was worse was that no one bothered to dispute this account. Why did no one come to your defence? Did no one think to say that the report was perhaps wrong?

I realize that this isn't always easy to do. Being in politics myself, I've often been roasted by the media. I think it's time we did something about that. Perhaps we could create a marketing position within the forces to see to it that similar incidents do not happen again.

You also said that you were losing pilots whom you had trained, of course, to commercial airlines.

Col. Benoît Marcotte: Technicians as well.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: I see.

Col. Benoît Marcotte: A number of technicians attempt to find employment outside the military. The problem is not restricted to pilots, even though that appears to be the main concern today. Clearly, the shortage of pilots could have a major impact, because if there are no pilots left to fly our planes, they will remain on the ground. It's also clear that if I don't have the technicians to repair the aircraft, since I rely on teamwork, I'm going to have some problems.

• 1850

In the case of some trades, a growing number of military people are being drawn to the private sector.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Then let me ask you this. Instead of letting someone come in and steal the pilots away from you, why not go out and steal them yourself? I know your going to say that it's a question of money.

Col. Benoît Marcotte: Training is also a consideration.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: However, considering what it costs you to train them, I think you could afford to hire a few more. What exactly does it cost to train a CF-18 pilot?

Col. Benoît Marcotte: According to one estimate, it costs approximately $5 million when we consider all related costs.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Five million dollars!

Col. Benoît Marcotte: That's correct!

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Five million for one pilot! I think we could afford several of them and even go out and steal a few away from someone else.

Col. Benoît Marcotte: We would need to train them for the job. You have to understand that the job of a CF-18 pilot is not simply to fly an aircraft, but also to fly a war plane to defend Canada or participate in an international mission. Therefore, a large part of the training consists of showing them how to do their job using this aircraft.

To fly and land an aircraft, as a commercial pilot does, is a rather routine operation, nothing like flying a CF-18. Moreover, our technicians and pilots are specialized in the type of military operation conducted under very different circumstances than those encountered in the private sector.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: You train them from A to Z. Perhaps you could give them some partial training, which would be less costly for you, in my view. I'm saying this simply because I'm trying to find a solution so that you can pay them adequately, and not face the prospect of losing them in the future.

I've also been told that from now on, you will be using the base in Moose Jaw for training operations, which will save you some money. Is that correct?

Col. Benoît Marcotte: We will share responsibility for training with other NATO countries. We will be setting up a kind of NATO school where students from other countries will be brought in. The cost of running the school will be shared by several countries. By taking this approach, we will continue to reduce our training costs.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Thank you.

Col. Benoît Marcotte: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Mrs. Venne.

[English]

Judi.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: I'm going to pick up on some of the themes Madame Venne was discussing.

We know we have to improve the image of the Canadian Forces. What can we do, what can you do, to set this in motion?

Col Benoît Marcotte: What we can do at the national level is definitely to explain to the Canadian public more what the role of the Canadian Forces is and have as a dominant feature why we need the military, why we need soldiers, airmen, and sailors in Canada. At the regional level here I think we're making a number of efforts in order to open up to the population, be better known in the region. These efforts have been going on for, I would say, about 10 years now in the Saguenay area.

Last summer we opened up the museum here in Bagotville, just as a gesture to explain to the population and the heavy tourist group we have in the region during the summer what the air defence of Canada is, what our tradition is, what our heritage is. At the same time we've opened up the base to popular visits. Last summer we had close to 6,000 travellers who came and visited Base Bagotville. They had a two-hour tour in which we explained to them what we're doing and how we were doing our mission here; what our mission is and how we're doing it. We're planning to repeat this program next summer from Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day until Labour Day, during the tourist season, again in order to try to improve the knowledge of Canadians, visitors, about what Bagotville does, and hopefully the armed forces in general.

Ms. Judi Longfield: That works for people who visit the area, but people who live in my area may not travel here and don't have the same opportunity. Are you prepared to issue press releases that members of Parliament could then take and issue on your behalf in ridings where there isn't a military presence, where we can start to bombard the small, local media with the good news stories, those things we're going to need if we're going to create the public will and determination to see that the conditions you're facing become top-of-mind? Right now they are not.

Col Benoît Marcotte: I hope our public affairs departments are producing those news releases. We're trying to do that every time there is significant activity.

• 1855

You saw in the local newspaper last weekend an article on the deployment of one of our F-18 squadrons to Norway next month for a major NATO exercise.

So we're trying to explain and, as I say, pass on the good news about what we're doing and why we're doing it. Hopefully it will reach your constituents in the east end of Toronto.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: If they don't, I may be contacting you so that you can provide that to me so that I can do it on your behalf, and I know there are other members who would be happy to do it.

Col Benoît Marcotte: I'd be glad to provide that.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: I'm going to leave that for a moment and move to another area.

What are the opportunities for advancement or promotion?

Col Benoît Marcotte: Do I need to answer?

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Only if you want it on the public record. I've heard it before, but I think the more times this comes out in a public forum, the better it is.

Col Benoît Marcotte: We have shrunk the armed forces by 20,000 military personnel. We're aiming for 60,000 military. You don't do that without having a significant impact on the organization. The chances for promotion for individuals, which is one chance to raise your salary a little bit, to jump up to the next rank, have been severely curtailed over the recent past. You heard the reaction of the people here.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: What about the adequacy of the incentive levels? How can we improve that? What suggestions do you have if you don't actually get a promotion?

Col Benoît Marcotte: There's a certain salary range for a particular rank level. If you divide that into 20 incentives rather than 10 incentives but the upper limit and the lower limits are the same, it gives you—

Mrs. Judi Longfield: It's just a bandage effect.

Col Benoît Marcotte: —a good news story for 20 years rather than 10 years, if we were playing at that level. So it's fixed by the range of salary you have for a particular rank.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Many years ago there was this thought that perhaps rather than look for a promotion from one rank to the other, the incentive levels be more lateral and for skill and knowledge there might be some additional dollars. Is that something we should be pursuing again, or is it something that would be very difficult to administer?

Col Benoît Marcotte: It's definitely one thing where our personnel are asking us why they get a new, special skill and are not compensated for it. I think I touched on that in my text. We've amalgamated our avionics technicians, our MOC 500 trades, from 13 to 4. People have new skills, but we don't seem to have new pay scales to compensate for the fact that people are better trained and have more capabilities. Maybe that's an area to pursue.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: So it's something you would suggest we pursue very vigorously.

Col Benoît Marcotte: That would give incentive for individuals to become more qualified, because they would get a reward for being more qualified by doing different kinds of work.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: We do it in other sectors. I don't know why we don't do it here.

Col Benoît Marcotte: That's right. Why not?

Mrs. Judi Longfield: I'll pass to Mr. Pratt.

The Chairman: Mr. Pratt.

Mr. David Pratt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Colonel, you raised the issue of transfers earlier on and the difficulty that creates. That's something we've certainly heard across the country.

If, as a policy, DND sought to reduce the number of transfers, what sort of impact, if any, do you think that would have on our operational capability?

Col Benoît Marcotte: It has a positive impact and a negative impact. The positive impact is if you're in a place where you want to be and you can dig some deeper roots, then it gives stability to the whole family. If you're in a place where you don't want to be and the service says you're going to be there for seven years rather than three, then it doesn't create quality of life for that particular family.

In some cases, people would like to transfer out early; in other situations, people would like to stay in a location. I must admit that in some cases we've been able to accommodate people's wishes. By looking at people who wanted to stay, let's say, here in Bagotville for a number of years, some of those individuals have had a chance to do that, to do that very well. We try to accommodate others as best we can.

This year is a particularly interesting year. The military as a whole will have a little above 5,000 military moves. So that will restrict a lot of movement this summer, and, as I say, there are some positive and negative impacts.

• 1900

Mr. David Pratt: Could you be a little bit more specific about the negative impacts?

Col Benoît Marcotte: As I say, people who want to move don't have a chance to move; they don't have the chance to see other places.

Mr. David Pratt: You mean negative impacts from an operational standpoint in terms of the skills of the people you're dealing with. Does it affect their skills if they're learning something, let's say, in Moose Jaw or Cold Lake that they might not be exposed to here?

Col Benoît Marcotte: In some cases it's nice to have people stay longer because then we benefit from the skills they're accumulating.

Let's say we're talking about a technician who works on the CF-18. If he has worked on the CF-18 for five years rather than three years, he's a better technician. That's normal. Moving them at a faster rate then tends to dilute a little bit...unless I get a technician coming in from another base with five years' experience on the F-18.

So on the operational side it might have a slight difference. At the same time, one of the reasons why military personnel are moving around from base to base is to gain different experiences, have a broader base of knowledge. That's one of the factors you lose by leaving people in one location for a long period.

Mr. David Pratt: Colonel, I don't want to put you on the spot, but we are encouraging people to speak frankly here tonight. If there is one issue that's a source of frustration for you in terms of dealing with National Defence headquarters, an issue that would affect your personnel, what would that be?

Col Benoît Marcotte: You say National Defence headquarters. You could also call it the air force headquarters in Winnipeg. Right now the frustration is easy. They've been downsized so much over the last two years, losing 50% of their personnel, that they're still in the reorganization mode. So it's difficult to grab their attention to deal with specific issues because they have to reorganize themselves and find out about the files somebody was doing that they are not longer doing. They're still in that sorting out mode, either in Ottawa or Winnipeg. That's the frustration right now.

We're trying to deal the best we can with the problems we have here while this process of consolidation of who does what in Winnipeg or Ottawa is finally sorted out. It's going to take time. There's nothing you can do about cutting an organization in half and have them spring up, ready to do operations and ready to support the operations at the tactical level well without having gone through that process first.

We have to give them time. We have a number of issues that are going on, a number of files that we're waiting for answers on. We're waiting for answers on the redress of grievances on different things. We have a number of those issues that I'm waiting....

They haven't sorted out yet who's going to do that work because they're still in that process.

Mr. David Pratt: Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, David.

Mr. Benoit.

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

A little earlier one of my colleagues made a comment that the defence department should do a better job of explaining why the military is needed. I would suggest that the Government of Canada in fact should do a better job of explaining why the military is needed. This is not to pick on any one government, because you could look at the record of any government for the past 30 years. How often have you heard the Prime Minister or another cabinet minister, especially the finance minister, come out and say, “We really need our military; they are providing a service this country needs”? Instead what we've heard—and this is, as I say, from governments for the past 30 years—either in words or in action is that in fact we probably don't need our military; there's no real threat. I think this is very foolish thinking on the part of governments, and we've been caught before with that type of thinking.

I would suggest it's up to the government of the day to tell Canadians we need our military and to say why we need them. I think it's important that that is done quite quickly.

You commented that you're losing pilots and there could be a shortage by summer. What about technicians? You say you're afraid of losing technicians. Could you in fact have a shortage of technicians in the near future, especially in certain areas of expertise or with certain expertise?

• 1905

Col Benoît Marcotte: We're losing some. It's not just a threat. I think I showed you a slide this afternoon of voluntary releases last year; it is soaring. People are not completing their 20 years but seeking alternative employment. We have them at various levels in the organization. It's not just pilots.

Pilots seem to be a more dominant feature. I have 46 F-18 pilots. I'm supposed to have 46 of them flying my F-18s in Bagotville. I'm saying next summer we're going to be below that. I'm supposed to have 23 per squadron. I'm going to be down to probably around 18 per squadron. So when we ask for a squadron to deploy somewhere it's not going to be as robust as it was two or three years go. That's just the sheer consequence of losing those individuals.

It could happen that the limiting factor will be that my technicians will not be there in order to fix those airplanes, and I would not be able to fly them regardless of whether or not I had the pilots. It's the same consequence. It's limiting our ability. With the inability to move in some people this summer to replace the people who are leaving, it leaves a problem here.

What we have here, at the end of everything, is a reduced military capability. I'm not going to have a squadron with 23 pilots. The airplanes will be there. They will be ready to fly, or they may be ready to fly, but they will not go anywhere because we won't have the personnel to man them, equip them, and fix them.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I have a lot of other questions I'd like to ask, but I think we'd better get on to some other people.

Thank you.

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

[Translation]

One final question, Colonel. If I understood correctly, a CF-18 pilot is under contract for a period of seven years.

Col. Benoît Marcotte: Recently, the mandatory contract term was extended from five to seven years.

The Chairman: In your view, should we extend the contract term to ten or maybe even twelve years in order to keep our pilots?

Col. Benoît Marcotte: That's one possible option to consider, but I don't know if it's possible, legally, to ask them to accept a contract like this or to commit for this many years. I believe we went with a seven-year term because of legal obligations that prevent us from forcing an individual to work for an organization any longer than this. However, I'm not an expert on the subject. Certainly, we want to benefit from a return on our investment for a longer period of time.

The Chairman: However, if this were acceptable from a legal standpoint, and if we were told by lawyers that it was possible to extend the contract to ten years, is this one option that you might consider?

Col. Benoît Marcotte: Perhaps.

The Chairman: You might consider it?

Col. Benoît Marcotte: That's difficult to say. We would also have to ascertain how many young people would be prepared to sign this type of contract and to commit to the Canadian forces for ten or twelve years. We need to consider the breaking point, as they call it. What kind of commitment are 18- or 19-year-olds prepared to make?

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Colonel.

Col. Benoît Marcotte: No, thank you.

The Chairman: I would now ask Chief Warrant Officer Gilbert to make his presentation.

Chief Warrant Officer Daniel Gilbert (individual witness): Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to thank you and the members of your committee for taking the time to come and hear the concerns of the Third Wing military community. Personally, I view the work of your committee as extremely important and I hope that the report that you will be presenting to the government will be supported.

During the course of these public hearings, military personnel and their spouses will share with you their concerns and discuss the problems associated with their membership in this extended military family.

I'm here simply to give you my opinion on the prevailing unease within Canada's armed forces today which is likely the cause of a number of problems that we are experiencing.

Members of Canada's armed forces are saying with growing frequency that being a soldier isn't what it used to be. Increasingly, they see themselves as company workers on the job from 8 to 4. Many armed forces members at all levels are leaving the military for better paying jobs. Being in the armed forces is viewed as a job, rather than as a lifestyle. What's the reason for this unease? Perhaps it can be traced to the multiple rounds of budget and staff cuts and to the shift to a consumer society.

The collapse of the Berlin Wall in October of 1989 heralded the end of the Cold War, the very reason why many infrastructures and military programs existed in the first place. Drastic cuts to several interim and subsequent budgets and the release of the 1994 White Paper on Defence announcing that the size of the Canadian forces would shrink from 84,000 in 1994 to 60,000 in 1999 sent a message to the military community: you are no longer needed, at least not in the same way that you were before.

• 1910

The financial chaos wreaked by years of wage freezes and the growth of a consumer society which associates value with material wealth has led to a situation where military wages are no longer enough to survive on in this society. Pride, the military community and the great past traditions of the Canadian forces are no longer strong drawing cards.

The Canadian forces and military communities are calling into question the reason for their existence. Today, Canadian forces must compete with industry, hence the emergence of the attitude that the Canadian forces are a business. The bottom line has become many people's number one priority.

Being a member of the armed forces is viewed as a job, rather than as a lifestyle. Since benefits enjoyed in the past are no longer available to them, why would personnel want to dedicate themselves to the military? They are choosing to look for better paying jobs in the private sector.

Our leadership has acknowledged that this malaise does exist and has set up a program to improve the quality of life for Canadian forces members. The Air Force was the first branch of the Canadian forces to recognize this problem. It has set up a committee, Flight Plan For Life, which I happen to belong to, to focus on the quality of life of our members. I believe you received information about this program when some of our senior officials appeared before you in Ottawa. The plan is based on the principle that our members are our most valuable resource, one that we must protect. Our members are somewhat skeptical when they hear this statement.

In some instances, our leadership has no choice but to go against their own wishes. Consider, for example, the number of transfers that will be approved for the coming fiscal year. To meet budget targets, only a limited number of transfers will be approved. This is what's known as the cost move in our jargon. To address this problem, a list has been drawn up to establish a priority for proposed moves. Transfers approved for family-related reasons are a priority 6, or last on the list . These are referred to as compassionate postings. While a number of proposed moves come under this category, this does not tie in very well with the objectives of the plan.

As a result of this decision, a number of individuals who were promised a transfer in 1998 will in fact not be transferred; unless a position is identified as critical to operations, the majority of positions left vacant by people being discharged will not be staffed before 1999; the director general of military careers made every effort in the past to comply with requests by military spouses for the same postings, but in 1998, he will have no flexibility whatsoever to satisfy such requests. More people will see their promotions pushed back to December 1, 1998. In many instances, the member will not be performing duties equal to his rank and this in turn will affect his rate of pay.

As many of you know, our leaders have no choice under the circumstances. It is easy to be cynical about this, but one thing is clear: we are currently suffering from anorexia and we are on the verge of starving to death, but someone is still managing to find some fat to trim. Compared to 1990, we are performing 95 percent of the tasks with 55 percent of the staff. In the process, we are continuing to put our pride, traditions and communities at risk. As the popular saying goes, we have cut the fat. What we've forgotten is that sometimes, we need fat to survive the lean years.

Our government has a responsibility to ensure an active presence and to support efforts to renew our military community. Only when this has been accomplished will we be able to offer our members the best that the Canadian forces have to offer, namely pride, a sense of community and a great sense of tradition. These three components must be renewed if we want a healthy organization for the future.

Speaking of pride, not so very long ago, those who did sign up were all very proud to wear the uniform. Across cities and towns, seamen, soldiers and airmen could be spotted—and not always in nightclubs - proudly wearing their uniforms. When a member of the military travelled, which at the time meant hitchhiking for the most part, the uniform guaranteed that he would get a ride to his destination.

Even with the many changes brought about by the unification of the forces in the late 1960s, wearing a uniform was associated with being someone in society.

• 1915

The Canadian forces enjoyed an excellent reputation and members were proud to be a part of the organization. People sought out the prestige of being associated with such an institution. Money was not a determining factor for joining or remaining in the Canadian forces. Salaries were not very high, but lifestyle and job security were attractive features. The sense of belonging and pride in wearing the uniform were often enough to convince people to sign up or to re-enlist.

Today, our pride has been undermined by financial mismanagement, by the perception on the part of Canadians that public funds are being abused and by numerous scandals such as initiation rites and in particular the incidents in Somalia. We have lost the support and admiration of Canadians. Our pride has been dealt a blow.

The Canadian forces have not helped their own cause either. The tendency to tolerate civilian dress at NDHQ headquarters on Fridays and during charter and military flights sends out a subtle message to our members. Is our leadership afraid that our personnel will misbehave in public?

All of these events have combined to bring about a loss of pride in wearing the uniform. This pride, once the only reason sometimes for a person to join or remain in the forces, is now on the wane. Pride and the honour of serving are no longer enough for our members.

We must focus our efforts on renewing this sense of pride in belonging to the Canadian forces. A Canadian forces member should be proud of the past, present and future of his organization. We must work to enhance the image of the military. Now more than ever, we are in a position to renew this sense of pride.

The climatic events of recent years have highlighted the abilities of the Canadian forces. The floods in the Saguenay in 1996 and in Manitoba in 1997 and recently, the ice storm in eastern Ontario and southern Quebec have raised the profile of our forces members. A recent poll conducted by Léger & Léger and published Quebec newspapers on January 24, 1998, gives Canadian forces a 96 per cent approval rating for their efforts during this disaster.

Our government should take advantage of this opportunity to boost our reputation. It should emphasize the dedication of Canadian forces members to their country during this crisis. We should send a message to society that Canadian forces hire the best of the best and that individuals who believe that they have the right stuff are welcomed to join us.

Were you aware that at the Olympics in Nagano, a member of the Canadian forces is representing our country in the biathlon event? If not, why not? While watching some Olympic coverage, I saw a commercial in which UPS boasted about the fact that one of its employees was a member of the bobsledding team. How is it that we are not doing the same thing?

The Canadian forces cannot market themselves like a regular Canadian employer. We must promote a particular lifestyle. The Canadian public must be proud of its soldiers, airmen and seamen. Only when the public decides to support the military will we be able to rekindle the pride that we have lost. The Canadian government has a duty to support the Canadian forces in the pursuit of its objectives.

Let's talk for a moment about the community. In the past, the sense of community was very strong. Military communities were closely tied to day-to-day operations and the people represented the strength of the community. The forces leadership unconditionally supported the military community because it was an extension of the forces' operational role.

Communities were self-sufficient, with each member pitching in and reaping the benefits. This dedication translated into messes that operated smoothly, community activities such as carnivals which were always eagerly anticipated, newspapers largely published by the community and even radio stations—there is one here in Bagotville—where volunteers provided community-based programming.

Members of the community got involved in these activities without any expectation of being paid for their efforts. Looking out for the welfare of the community was their only reward. All of these activities were funded by the Canadian forces because the leadership recognized the value of a strong and united community.

Extensive budget cuts have affected public support of military communities. Canadian forces and military communities are calling into question their very existence. The fundamental values of the military community are eroding.

In this new era, Canadian forces must compete with industry, which explains the emergence of a new attitude or business mind-set, as I mentioned earlier. For many people, community work is viewed as a burden which carries no monetary benefit. Our members are turning to better paying jobs outside the military. Their dedication to the community has been mortally wounded.

Our leadership as a duty to rekindle this sense of community and of belonging to the military. We must emphasize the benefits that come from being a member of a strong and united military community by giving people the opportunity to sample the joy that comes from being a part of a healthy organization.

• 1920

Being a member of the forces must become once again a way of life, not only at job. Belonging to an organization like the Canadian forces should be a major step on the road to achieving self-esteem and a feeling of well-being. Our leadership must provide forces members with the tools and support they need to develop the military community.

Government must in turn support our community by putting in place programs geared to the military which will help families handle the many moves that they must make. A military family should not have to take a pay cut to better serve their country. It already has to contend with many problems, among others, the loss of a spouse's job, different taxes, the price of housing and automobile insurance, and so on.

A child should not have to be subjected to the bureaucratic wranglings of the various education ministries to find out what grade he should be in each time his family is posted somewhere. For example, when I was posted to Quebec, I inquired at the provincial education ministry and I was told that it made no difference whether I came from Zimbabwe or Manitoba. I was very happy to hear that.

Our spouses should not have to constantly recycle themselves in order to find work after a new posting. Why not set aside some of the jobs on the base for spouses? Believe me, these persons are completely familiar with the military environment and would be an asset to the Canadian forces.

Let's talk now about noble traditions. Freedom of the city military parades, military music, air shows, to name but a few, were an integral part of military tradition. Ceremonies commemorating November 11, the Battle of Britain, the Battle of the Atlantic and other similar events were opportunities for forces members to recall for the public's benefit the heritage and tradition of excellence of the organization.

Messes and their activities were also an important part of the life of each military member. Official regimental dinners and candlelight suppers were always eagerly anticipated events. These traditions were the envy of many other departments and organizations.

Canadian forces sports teams were also part of our great traditions. The participation of a military team in a sporting event in neighboring communities always guaranteed a good turnout. The Olympics are now underway. How can we ever forget that a Royal Canadian Air Force hockey team was the last Canadian team to win an Olympic gold medal?

These activities closely tied to life on a base are just a few examples of the great traditions that have developed over the years. Our leadership once appreciated the value of these activities and was willing to support them financially.

Today, as a result of countless budget cuts, we have been forced to rationalize our operations and our tasks. Services such as military music, one of our oldest traditions, military parades and public performances have fallen by the wayside. Official regimental dinners have become a rarity because they are too costly to hold. Furthermore, events such as the base carnival, family days, and other traditions have been identified as extras that are costly, in terms of both money and resources.

Our sports programs and our teams have been downsized to the point where in order to participate in competitions as Canadian forces representatives, our members must occasionally cover some of the expenses themselves.

Temporary assignments among units to stage sporting events are out of the question. Our most glorious traditions are on the verge of disappearing. As leaders, we are being asked to bolster these traditions, but we are given no financial support to do so. Even if we did get the support, the shortage of personnel in certain units would make it impossible for us to sustain these traditions.

The fat has been trimmed, or so we have been told. It is difficult to gauge the impact that the loss of our customs and traditions has had, but clearly, the damage could be irreparable.

Canadian forces must invest in their noble traditions; talking just simply isn't enough. Regimental dinners, public ceremonies, Canadian forces days, to name but a few, must be supported financially.

Admittedly, a number of old traditions must be adapted or better yet, new traditions must be established. Here again, our leadership must be prepared to invest both time and money in order to achieve this goal.

The Canadian forces cannot simply turn their backs on tradition on the pretense that it wastes valuable time and human resources. When the Canadian forces and the government support heritage and tradition, they are supporting their own future.

The Canadian forces have come to a crossroads in terms of their development. The current climate is not conducive to fostering pride in or the growth of the military community and the great Canadian forces tradition.

The forces are losing more and more of their senior and junior members, not only because of the pay issue, but also because they no longer find in today's military the values and ambiance that led them to join up in the first place.

• 1925

Those who do chose to remain are often overworked. They must do more with less, even as the government provides less and less support. Forces members must have the opportunity to benefit from intangibles such as pride, community and great traditions. These benefits make the difference between being a member of the military and merely having a job which will never pay enough. Indeed, Mr. Chairman, how much should a person who is prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice for his or her country be paid?

I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me this opportunity to express my views clearly to the committee. I would also like to publicly thank our leadership for asking that a committee like this look into the socioeconomic problems plaguing the Canadian forces.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Mrs. Venne.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: First of all, no one can accuse you of being overly optimistic. That's for certain.

Chief Warrant Officer Daniel Gilbert: At least I continue to smile.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: I was happy to hear you say that we need to know more about the duties that military personnel perform. This ties in perfectly with what I was saying earlier to the Colonel.

However, I disagree when you say that this is the government's responsibility. I believe—I said it earlier and I'll say it again—that the forces should be out there promoting themselves and their activities both at home and abroad.

Chief Warrant Officer Daniel Gilbert: Give me the funding, and I'll do it myself.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: I'm sorry, but it's not always a matter of money. I disagree with you. Money isn't always an issue. It's not difficult to issue a simple press release and it doesn't cost anything.

What about the Internet? It may cost something, but have you considered promoting the forces on the Internet?

Chief Warrant Officer Daniel Gilbert: Yes, we have.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Then why not mention on the Internet that a member of the Canadian forces is competing in the Olympics? Has anyone thought of doing that?

Chief Warrant Officer Daniel Gilbert: I was wondering about that myself.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: That's what I mean. Why hasn't somebody acted? Everyone is passing the buck. Someone is going to have to accept responsibility for this at some point.

Everyone's always blaming the government and saying that it must take action. Mind you, it's not up to me to defend the government, but all I'm saying is that you should take a very close look at what the forces are doing.

Secondly, you referred to the benefits that you previously enjoyed and that are no longer available to you.

Chief Warrant Officer Daniel Gilbert: That's correct.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Which benefits are you referring to? Could any of them be restored, unless of course, the cost of doing so is prohibitive?

Chief Warrant Officer Daniel Gilbert: You are now in what was formerly a school for children of the military. As I said, when we moved from one province to another, we didn't have to contend with bureaucracy. As the commander mentioned, grade levels sometimes differ from one province to the next. These schools were one of the benefits that our military communities enjoyed.

At one time, public funds were available for such things as radio stations. During the 1960s and 1970s, Bagotville had a very large Anglophone community. The operation of the radio station was financially assisted.

As I said, these are intangibles, the little extras that make a member of the military feel like part of a larger family. It's the little things that have been cut. When these go, all that remains is our salary and that just isn't enough.

How much should we be paid for putting our lives on the line for our country? It's impossible to put a price tag on something like that. We need to consider the broader picture.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Basically, what you want is to have the feeling that you belong.

Chief Warrant Officer Daniel Gilbert: The feeling of belonging and also the feeling that the military community is supported.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Did I hear you say that an order has been issued to members to wear civilian dress when taking a commercial flight? Did I understand you correctly? You were speaking quite quickly. I can understand why, because you have much to say. Did I in fact hear you correctly?

Chief Warrant Officer Daniel Gilbert: I said that civilian dress at NDHQ was tolerated on Fridays and on chartered and military flights.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: I understand now.

I'm curious as to the average age of technicians and pilots. What is it?

Chief Warrant Officer Daniel Gilbert: I can tell you that on average, the members stationed at Bagotville have been in the forces 16 years. Depending on how old they were when they signed up, members are on average 35 or 36 years of age.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: I see. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Mrs. Venne.

• 1930

[English]

Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you two for your presentation. You obviously hit on a lot of points that are important to the people who are here. They supported your statements.

One thing you focused on a few times was the pride in wearing the uniform. You said people in the forces should consider being in the forces more as a way of life than a job, and you talked about the intangible heritage of the forces and the fact that these things aren't there as a major part of the reason people are dissatisfied.

Especially in Valcartier last night, and at Pointe-à-Carcy, at the naval complex in Quebec City and in other places, I've heard people express a lot of pride in wearing the uniform. They had a lot of concerns, a lot of things they are very unhappy about, but there is a lot of pride. I'm wondering if that is the major concern, or is it more concrete things, like stress in the family due to unnecessary split-ups, when one spouse is sent in one direction and the family is left behind when it's unnecessary, when it could be accommodated?

Is it things like the whole uncertainty of being in the military today? There's the uncertainty that your family will not be together a month from now, that the military person might be dragged away. There's a lot of uncertainty about there actually being a lifelong career in the military. I'm wondering if this uncertainty in fact isn't one of the key factors, and of course the factors of too little pay and too much difficulty in the spouse getting a job.... I wonder if these more concrete things aren't more of a reason for the discontent than the intangibles you referred to.

CWO Daniel Gilbert: I wouldn't put them on a scale. I have personal feelings about the whole thing.

Pride? We have had a resurgence, yes, you are right. As I mentioned, the floods of 1996-97 and the ice storm crisis we just lived through really put the focus on the Canadian Forces—a good focus. Go back to about 10 months or a year ago and you find that it was entirely different. I had a member who told me, “I'm ashamed. I don't wear my uniform downtown because I'm afraid of being recognized.” This was said to me on occasion.

There is a resurgence right now. What I'm saying is that we have to keep working on it.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes. It's very unfortunate that it takes a disaster like a flood in Manitoba, a flood in Quebec, or an ice storm to bring back pride in the uniform in our country. It's very sad indeed.

Thank you.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

I now invite Lieutenant-Colonel Jean-Luc Desgroseilliers to begin his presentation.

Lieutenant-Colonel Jean-Luc Desgroseilliers (individual witness): Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, my presentation this evening will focus on the imposed restriction status in effect following a transfer.

The imposed restriction status has applied to me since my arrival here in Bagotville in July 1996 following a transfer from Ottawa. Why did I request this status? Primarily because I wanted to offer some educational stability to my two teenagers and to allow my spouse to keep her job in Ottawa. Let me elaborate further.

As far as providing some academic stability for our two teenagers is concerned, in September 1996, our daughter was entering her second year at Algonquin College in Ottawa, whereas our son was starting Grade 12, also in Ottawa. Clearly, this was not the right time to have them change schools or to disrupt their schooling.

• 1935

Had the family all moved to Bagotville in the summer of 1996, my son would have found himself attending his fourth high school in five years, not just in three different countries, but in two different provinces as well. Clearly, the transfer would not have helped our children's education. Therefore, they remained behind in Ottawa.

As for my spouse's job, since we had moved 11 times during the course of my 26-year career, my wife had had to give up any chance of pursuing a career. She did a lot of volunteer work and odd jobs here and there, but there was no future in this.

After several months of looking for a job when we were posted to Ottawa in 1994, she finally succeeded in finding a rewarding one that offered some career opportunities. I've had my career and I felt it was time to give my wife a chance to pursue her own. She therefore stayed behind in Ottawa and I came to Bagotville by myself.

As you know, Ottawa is more than a stone's throw from Bagotville. Since July 1996, I've visited my family on average once a month on long weekends. I call them long weekends because of the amount of time I spend travelling between the two places.

What impact has this had on our lives? We have to look at it from both sides, that is from my perspective here in Bagotville and from my wife's perspective, alone with our children in Ottawa. Unlike my wife, I really have it easy here in Bagotville. I'm housed and fed, in addition to having a rewarding job as part of an excellent team of people.

Life is not as rosy for my spouse. She has to deal with two teenagers and their studies, the house, the car, snow storms, ice storms, to mention only a few things. However, just as we have done for the past 26 years, we'll get through this too.

In closing, I would like to take this opportunity to publicly thank my wife and my two teenagers for their support, courage, tenacity and loyalty, not only during these difficult times, but also during my lengthy absences throughout the course of my career, most notably a six-month posting to Alert several years ago.

I think we're seriously underestimating the significant contribution of our spouses to the armed forces and I would like to thank them all at this time. Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Captain Louis Turcotte.

Captain Louis Turcotte (individual witness): Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen, members of the committee, I've been the Catholic chaplain here at the base since 1995.

As I was preparing for my presentation this evening, I tried to think about all of the concerns that military personnel and their families share with me every day. I tried to comprehend what's going on in their lives and to understand their experiences. I'm going to relate to you the problems that the families under my spiritual guidance experience. Of course, I have served as chaplain on other military bases before coming here and therefore, I do have some knowledge of the subject.

Many of the problems they encounter are similar to those encountered by regular civilians. It's no different for a person just because he is in the forces. However, they may experience additional stress under certain situations.

• 1940

Obviously, we can't change the system completely. Nothing is perfect in this world. However, higher-ranking individuals in the armed forces could be more tactful. For example, they shouldn't dangle before a member and his family the prospect of a transfer that isn't going to happen. As someone said earlier, members and their families come from remote regions or from other provinces and end up here sometimes for three or four years. Initially, they accept the challenge, but as the years pass, they are told that because of budget cuts, a transfer is out of the question. This news is bitterly disappointing to them. These same cutbacks are often cited as the reason for this decision.

As someone already mentioned, the prospects of getting a promotion are not great, which means that morale is not very high. Occasionally, injustices occur when our military members undergo their annual appraisal. I have observed a drop in motivation not only among military members, but also among their spouses.

Much has been said about the quality of life. It is declining, along with the services provided. Consider the fact that snow is no longer being cleared from sidewalks. People end up walking in the streets, and someone will eventually get hit. Many people are deeply disillusioned, perhaps because of the cutbacks.

As chaplain, I try to attend to people's spiritual needs, but that isn't always easy.

In today's world, many couples are experiencing problems, and it is no different in the military. There is perhaps even more reason for military couples to have problems. We need to show people how to manage a budget. You will hear later on from some individuals who are more knowledgeable about this than me. Mismanaging the family finances can affect a couple's relationship, increase stress levels and ultimately lead to marital breakdown.

Another problem is that their immediate family which would normally be a source of some support is not in the vicinity. When a military wife gives birth to a child and her mother lives in the Gaspé region or in North Bay, it could be hard for the parent to come and lend some support. When an illness or death strikes the parents of military members, they go through more hard times. Boredom and routine often blend together. Although members of the military are quite willing to do their share, lengthy assignments and actual departures can prove difficult.

I hope that I can serve as a lightning rod and prevent disaster from striking. That's about all I wanted to share with you this evening.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Corporal Christine Larivière.

Corporal Christine Larivière (individual witness): I'm here to speak to you as a single parent and reservist.

What I would like to know most of all is whether it would be possible for reservists to always work the same number of days each month, instead of a variable schedule. Sometimes, we work eight days and at other times, ten.

Regular military personnel are covered under the GMSIP, the Group Surgical-Medical Insurance Plan, while reservists are not. Would be possible for us to be included in the plan, and also to be eligible for dental care insurance? As the head of a single-parent family, I'm covered for the moment, but does this privilege extend to all other single-parent families? It's not easy to raise a family on a low income. Rent can be quite costly.

• 1945

I wish the training courses that we are required to attend were held in the summer, because at all other times of the year, day care can be a rather expensive proposition.

That pretty much summarizes my concerns.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Corporal.

Could you come back to the microphone?

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: If I might, I would like to ask you two questions.

You're a member of the reserves, isn't that right?

Cpl Christine Larivière: Yes.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Do you work elsewhere?

Cpl Christine Larivière: Yes, I have another job, but I work on call.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Obviously, neither my colleagues nor I can answer your question. Do you have a career manager? I've often heard of this. Does this apply to reservists?

Cpl Christine Larivière: Yes, we do have an officer that handles our careers.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Shouldn't he keep you informed of such matters? I asked the question, because unfortunately, we cannot answer your questions. Certainly you should be able to call upon someone in the military. That's what I was trying to get at.

The Chairman: Mrs. Marise Ouellet and Mrs. Martine Simard.

Mrs. Martine Simard (individual witness): Good evening. We've been asked to present a summary of what military spouses experience when their husbands leave on UN missions. Marise and I have some first-hand knowledge of this situation, since our husbands returned in December from a mission to Haiti.

On May 29, we were informed that Bernard was scheduled to leave in September. We had planned to take our vacation between May and September because Bernard was going to be away six months, until the end of March or the end of the fiscal year. We couldn't postpone our holidays until after then, since the new fiscal year would be starting. Unfortunately, we were not in a mood to enjoy our vacation. Normally, you should be able to relax during a three-week holiday.

When my husband leaves on a mission, my children and I experience some worries and insecurity. The period leading up to his departure is very hectic. Bernard must make the necessary arrangements, ensure that everything is taken care of, the car, the house, and that everyday details are attended to. Stress levels are high. As is often the case, we were notified of his departure date at virtually the last minute. In Marise's case, it was even worse. She truly did get the word at the last minute.

Mrs. Marise Ouellet (individual witness): We were on our honeymoon when my husband was recalled and sent on a training assignment. It was all decided very quickly, and I was very frustrated, an unusual reaction for me. I realized that in the eyes of the forces, I didn't matter much. One moment, I was on cloud nine, and the next, someone was punching me in the stomach. I had to return to base, and I didn't find that amusing in the least.

I would also like to speak to you about training. My husband was scheduled to leave for six months, but we were fortunate because his mission was shortened. The training preceding the mission consisted of one month in Valcartier and one week in Kingston. The week in Kingston was perfect, not too long. However, why did he have to spend four weeks in Valcartier? According to my husband, the training could just is easily been provided in one and a half weeks.

• 1950

What it comes down to is that these missions do not last six months, but rather seven months and one week, if we take into account the training time.

Mrs. Martine Simard: In our case, it was an eight-month mission, because my husband's training lasted two months. I don't feel it was necessary for the training to have lasted that long.

Mrs. Marise Ouellet: Another unpleasant thing that Martine and I had to put up with was the uncertainty surrounding our husbands' return date. When they left, we were told that they might possibly be home for the holidays. There was a good chance of this, but nothing was certain. Finally, we were informed on December 3 that they would be back on the 20th. The most frustrating thing was not knowing immediately whether they would be back or not.

My husband and I had planned a vacation before his departure. Normally, when he takes part in a six-month mission, he can expect to return for two or three weeks after four months, usually right in the middle of the mission. We had planned a trip to Mexico in January. All of a sudden, the mission ended and we were forced to cancel our vacation. It was really frustrating, because we had thought we were going to be together, and then our vacation plans fell through. We were happy to hear that the mission was ending, but we were disappointed as well because of the travel plans we had made.

The uncertainty can be quite frustrating as well.

Martine.

Mrs. Martine Simard: I would also like to talk briefly about how children feel when their father is away. At times like this, children and mothers experience a great deal of stress. Worry is a big problem.

I have three children: Marie-Michèle, Marc-André and Karine. Marie-Michèle asked me why I had let her father leave. As if I had any say in the matter! I explained to her at length why he had to be away. Often at bedtime, I would find Marie-Michèle and Marc-André crying. Marc-André would cry, clutch his father's sweater and say that he would rather be hugging his father tonight. During the first month, Marie-Michèle missed her father so much that she lost her appetite.

At bedtime, Karine, my three-and-a-half year-old, would want to give her father a hug. When I would tell her that was impossible because her father was far away, she would begin to cry.

Bernard would send us tapes, instead of writing letters, because he found it faster that way. My three-and-a-half year-old would cry when she heard his voice. She would answer his questions, but when she asked him questions, he wouldn't answer and she would start crying again.

When he returned in December and resumed working in January, she would cry when he left because she thought he wasn't coming back. I had to explain to her that Daddy went to work during the day and came home in the evening.

It was hard for the children and for myself as well to understand some things. It was hard to always say the right thing to keep their spirits up. It was difficult for Bernard too because I would share with him everything that we were going through.

It's not exactly an ideal situation when your husband leaves in the middle of the winter. Additional costs must be incurred for snow removal, costs for which you are not reimbursed. I was quoted a figure of $425.

Day care costs cannot be recovered either. I'm all alone with three children. As you can imagine, some evenings, I'm tired. Marise and I went out together a few times. Other times, we would have liked to, but since Bernard wasn't there to babysit, we preferred not to spend any extra for a sitter.

• 1955

We would also like to discuss the issue of multi-service centers. We've received a great deal of support from the multi-service center and we would like to thank all of the people who work there.

Unfortunately, even though we were not alone in this situation, attendance at meetings organized by the multi-service center were poor. Some meetings even had to be cancelled.

I would like to see this center do more for children and take some follow-up action. I found it difficult and I would have liked the children to be able to take part in activities where they could open up and express their feelings.

Mrs. Marise Ouellet: Not all of you are going to like the question that I'm about to ask. Could someone explain to me why UN missions have to last six months? Six months is a long time. A three-month mission would suffice, although I've often heard it said that when a husband returns after three months and then must turn around and leave again, it's still terrible, even though he may only be gone a few days. I don't have any children, but judging from what I've heard, I would surely react the same way. When your husband returns, you enjoy each other's company for a week or two, and think about nothing else, and then he has to leave again. You must constantly adjust your way to thinking. Six months is an awfully long time. I merely wanted to mention that.

Mrs. Martine Simard: There's one other important point that I would like to make. Because we are so far away from our families, we cannot count on their immediate support. Would it be possible to cover expenses so that families, spouses and children on the base can go and visit their families? When you're in Winnipeg and your family is in the Gaspé region, it's not a matter of deciding overnight to get in the car and go. It would be nice if they covered our expenses so we could visit our families.

Let me glance at my notes to make sure that I haven't forgotten anything. That's about it. I know that other women here have had the same experiences as me, and that some may have had an even harder time of it. Certainly they will have something to add to this.

Although he's not here, I would like to take this opportunity to thank my husband's boss who constantly called me to lend his support and to find out how I was doing. It's important to know that someone on the base cares.

That's all.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

We will now go to questions.

[English]

Mr. Benoit, you have a question.

Mr. Leon Benoit: The question is for either or both of you.

You talked about the impact of deployment on your children. I'm wondering if it would be easier to deal with a deployment overseas if you knew with some certainty that the family would be together for a sustained period of time, say a year, after deployment.

You commented that shorter deployments would be better, but I guess my question is whether shorter, more frequent deployments would be better than having a longer deployment less often and therefore more time with your family between these longer deployments? Would both of you comment on that, please? It's the same question.

[Translation]

Mrs. Marise Ouellet: Martine, what are your feelings about that?

Mrs. Martine Simard: If you don't mind, I would prefer to answer in French, as my French is better than my English.

More frequent assignments are not any better either. It might be less difficult for the family, although I can't imagine seeing Bernard leave again after his recently completed three-month mission. Had he returned for a two-week or three-week vacation, and then left again, the family would still have been disrupted. We would have had to start all over again with the children and the family would still have been in turmoil.

• 2000

You mentioned shorter missions and more frequent departures. The idea of more frequent departures doesn't appeal to me either. Obviously, we don't have any choice in the matter because it's all part of their jobs. Three-month, rather than six-month missions would be more bearable. A person must prepare psychologically for a six-month mission. Three months is a shorter period of time.

Mrs. Marise Ouellet: Admittedly, over the course of a 25- or 30- year career, some members are only gone for a total of six months. If my husband were ordered to take part in 10 three-month missions, I wouldn't be afraid. Nor would I'd be afraid if he were sent on only two or three missions over the course of 30 years.

I have to wonder why some members who are willing to go are never or rarely sent on assignments, whereas others who would prefer to stay behind are shipped out. Some ask to go for many years, but are never sent away. Some are single and willing to go on repeated missions. The job at the other end requires a member of the military, and it matters little if he is married or single.

Mrs. Martine Simard: Perhaps it wasn't clear enough about a particular point earlier. We usually know in advance which members are scheduled to leave on assignment. Usually we know by January or February that someone is slated to leave in September. Missions are for consecutive periods of six months. Why wasn't I told about this in February, instead of in May, at the same time as everyone else? I could have prepared myself, and we could have made alternate arrangements for our vacation. Our lives were disrupted. I may not be answering your question directly, but I wanted to say this.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

[Translation]

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

Mrs. Venne.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: I have a question for...

Mrs. Marise Ouellet: Yes.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: Excuse me?

Mrs. Marise Ouellet: Go ahead with your question.

Mrs. Pierrette Venne: I'm not trying to be clever, because I think it takes a lot of courage to come here and share your experiences with us. It's important, especially for women, to do so.

You failed to mention one detail that a woman told me about. Are you really listed as a "dependent" on your ID card? How is that possible? I find that unbelievable and terrible even! I'm going to speak out against that everywhere I go. Women are considered dependents in the Canadian Armed Forces. That's terrible! Even if a woman holds an outside job and earns her own income, she is considered a dependent. That's unbelievable!

Unfortunately, family life, at least from your perspective, is not viewed as a priority in the forces. There is, in my view, a real desire at the higher levels within the forces to change this and to make family life a priority from here on in.

The points that you raised have been mentioned often, including the fact that the return date is not known and that there is little contact with the member on assignment. You may not even know his location. There is another issue, not related to missions, which does not appear to have been addressed here. It seems that spouses are not entitled to use the services of military hospitals. Is that also the case here?

Ms. Martine Simard: Yes.

• 2005

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Were you given any reason for that? Do you think we should recommend that you should be able to be treated here, in the hospital? Would your quality of life be improved? Would that change much for you?

Ms. Marise Ouellet: For me personally, no.

Ms. Martine Simard: Me neither.

Ms. Marise Ouellet: It would change absolutely nothing. I think I'd rather be treated...

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Oh dear! Are you calling into question the quality of care?

Ms. Marise Ouellet: I meant no such thing.

[Editor's note: Inaudible]. In any event, the hospital in Ville de la Baie is seven kilometres from here, and the one in Chicoutimi is about 15 kilometres away.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Ok. It may be better to put that aside for now.

Ms. Marise Ouellet: Yes.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: All right. Thank you. That's all I wanted to ask you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Madam Venne.

[English]

Mr. Pratt.

Mr. David Pratt: Mr. Chair, I don't have a question so much as a suggestion in terms of possible research for the committee with respect to the six-month posting issue. I think we should find out, first of all, from NDHQ whether or not that's an absolute operational necessity.

We should also look into the policies of our allies, in terms of those who are serving with the UN in places like Haiti and Yugoslavia, and whether they're shorter than six months, six months, or even longer.

It would also, I think, be interesting to know whether or not the UN has any specific rules in terms of transferring personnel in and out of theatres of operation.

The Chairman: Good point, Mr. Pratt. I'm sure they're looking into it right now, as we speak.

Voices: Oh, oh!

The Chairman: Judi Longfield.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: I'm curious about the opportunity to communicate with a spouse during deployment. How often is this made available?

[Translation]

Ms. Martine Simard: We didn't experience any communication problems. The lines were working very well when I communicated with my spouse in Haiti, which was not the case in Yugoslavia where the lines were sometimes cut off. We didn't have that problem. However, we were given limited time and we were only allowed one or two phone calls a week. Once the 12 minutes were up, the line was cut off. If he hadn't yet said "I love you", too bad. The line was cut off. The best thing to do to make sure we told each other everything was to use a chronometer.

Ms. Marise Ouellet: Yes, Martine, but we were allowed a 12-minute call once a day.

Ms. Martine Simard: Twelve minutes once a day? No, 12 minutes two or three times a week.

Ms. Marise Ouellet: Oh yes!

Ms. Martine Simard: Oh yes!

Ms. Marise Ouellet: Ok.

Ms. Martine Simard: You guys were newlyweds!

[English]

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Maybe they made a special.... In your case, if they cut off your honeymoon, maybe they did.

Voices: Oh, oh!

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Are there e-mail capabilities as well when they're deployed?

[Translation]

Ms. Martine Simard: No I didn't use E-mail.

[English]

Mrs. Judi Longfield: What about getting information about the mission in terms of the progress while they're there? How is that communicated to you?

[Translation]

Ms. Martine Simard: We could obtain information regarding the mission by calling the 1-800 "Mission Information" line regularly. My husband also described what was going on over there. The children received information by mail regarding Haiti in general. Those were our sources of information. The information we received from our husbands was more detailed than what we had on the base, which, in my opinion, was not really aware of what was going on. It's really our husbands who were keeping us abreast of what was happening.

Ms. Marise Ouellet: That information line was not up-to-date. Maybe the update was not done on a daily basis.

Ms. Martine Simard: No, the information was only updated every week.

• 2010

Ms. Marise Ouellet: Our best source of information was our talks with our spouses.

[English]

Ms. Judi Longfield: I was wondering about this because we have heard in other areas that frequently those left behind were forced to watch CNN or Newsworld to get information about what was happening, and I don't think this is the way we should be—

[Translation]

Ms. Marise Ouellet: I think that was the worse thing. When you watch the news and you see the war, you can imagine all sorts of horrible things.

Ms. Martine Simard: That's right. For example, the newscasts announced the withdrawal of our forces in November, if I recall correctly. Our husbands were telling us at that point that nothing was certain and that this was still being discussed. The newscasts were stating that it was certain; they weren't really the best source or the most reliable source.

[English]

Ms. Judi Longfield: I agree with you. It shouldn't be the way in which we get it. But sometimes it's the only thing we have. I think we have to correct that.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Judi.

[Translation]

Thank you very much, ladies.

[English]

Charmaine Sammut, please.

Ms. Charmaine Sammut (Individual Presentation): Good evening, ladies and gentlemen and members of the standing committee. In particular, I would like to say hello to Mr. Benoit. I just moved here from Cold Lake, and by the way, I voted for him.

This evening I'm here to represent a group of anglophone military wives who, upon receiving the invitation to come to the hearings, made the decision that it would be beneficial for us to meet and discuss our concerns about the quality of our life here.

We feel CFB Bagotville represents a very unique situation because of the language challenge to us. Through our combined experiences since arriving here there was a strong mutual consent that the language training and integration services provided by the military are sadly lacking. We understand those who are responsible for the programs here are doing the best they can with what they have been given, but I feel, and we all feel, that by no means excuses the obvious gaps that are apparent in the military language training system for dependants.

I'm not saying that in a malicious manner. I hate that word as well.

Currently the regulations dictate that a mandatory percentage of military members who require language training be registered before the military will even entertain offering the course to dependants. Therefore currently no beginners course is available and there is doubt whether the intermediate course on the base will continue after the end of March. Although a full-time, year-long course is offered to the military at the cégep in Jonquière, only 10 spots are available and of course a certain number of those are reserved for military members, and there's a waiting list.

All this is contrary to what we as wives were told before accepting our transfer here. We were assured services available through the military were more than adequate. But since arriving we have all learned the hard truth that insufficient funding is provided by the government and little is being done to rectify the situation.

The word “dependants” is indicative of our predicament. We are exactly that. But I feel we are much more than that. We are the indispensable support system for the military members. Therefore I feel the government and the military have an obligation to provide the services we need; not want but need. In order for us to regain our independence, we have to have integration services that will enable us to be functional, active, and contributing members of this community.

Our second point of concern is in the same vein but ventures into the life-essential information services. While it is true an anglophone services committee is sponsored through the multi-services centre, again through our combined experiences we feel a definite gap exists.

• 2015

The information that is currently offered through the multi-services centre is normally confined to the services available here on the base. Most of us have experienced difficulties in discovering how to obtain such essential services as health care insurance and our cards, drivers' licences and plates, vehicle inspections, doctors, dentists, even right down to hairdressers and English school-entrance requirements. I can tell you that no other province in Canada requires the kind of paperwork that is demanded here for our children to be able to receive their education in English. I think it's a shame.

This is just an example of information that we have obtained only through word of mouth or from making extensive inquiry ourselves. We would suggest that those who are in charge of new arrival information be trained or be familiar with all the changes that are mandatory coming from another province and the various government agencies that must be contacted.

In brief, our third concern is similar to that of other members across Canada, and that is the question of salaries. Salaries have been a major concern of late, not just for members but for their families as well, since it has been close to six years since there have been any favourable increases, not just cost-of-living allowances. Moving here has placed an increased burden on families as it is a well-known fact that the cost of living in Quebec is very high and that the personal income tax rate is inflated in comparison with other provinces. As well, the provincial income tax regulations tax certain benefits here that in other provinces are not recognized as income.

Most families moving here experience additional financial hardship due to the fact that they're reduced to a one-income family if the spouse is anglophone and therefore prevented from obtaining employment while here. Again, the attitude of not just the military but the unemployment services here has proven to be less than supportive about integration and aiding the spouse in obtaining employment.

We were able to review information that was given to us by our spouses that gave a brief overview of the hearings that have taken place across Canada thus far. One of the recommendations that we strongly agree with is the idea of an ombudsman for military dependants. We feel it would be extremely beneficial to have a non-military designate who would represent our interests in these types of situations.

I hope you will consider what we have presented to you tonight and realize that it is in the best interest of the government to improve the quality of life of the military members in order that they may perform to the best of their ability.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: First of all, thank you for your vote. It's much appreciated.

The Chairman: We won't hold that against you.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Your comments on language training are interesting. I think we've heard comments on language training before, but this is probably the best indicator we've had that things aren't as they should be.

The salary, of course, is a concern we've heard about again and again. But I want to ask you a question about the ombudsman position. There was a recommendation made by the Somalia commission to put in place an independent inspector general. The response from the defence department was to put in place an ombudsman, but the ombudsman would report to the Minister of National Defence, so it really wouldn't be an independent position in any way. When you're supporting the concept of an ombudsman, are you supporting very much an independent ombudsman that really isn't answerable to the minister, or are you supporting that ombudsman, as has been suggested by the Chief of Defence Staff in recommendations made before Christmas?

Ms. Charmaine Sammut: I think our idea was that it would be somebody who didn't have to directly answer to the local authorities, to the local military per se. They wouldn't have to be afraid of pressures from within the military base per se.

• 2020

Mr. Leon Benoit: So the greatest concern is that the ombudsman in no way has to be concerned about what the people on the local base feel about the recommendation.

Ms. Charmaine Sammut: Yes.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you.

I just have a very short question. When we visited the family resource centre this afternoon, I remember asking about language training. The lady told me that there was a course given and it had no waiting time. If a spouse wanted to enroll, there was no waiting time.

Ms. Charmaine Sammut: That's not true. Look at my own experience. I'm a volunteer at the multi-services centre. From the experiences of my own friends I've made since I moved here, a lot of us felt that we needed a beginner's course in French. This was not available to us, and it's currently not available. There are no plans to have a beginner course.

We were asked if we wanted to join the intermediate-level course, which we did, because at the time it was the only thing available to us. We tackled it as best we could, but found that when you get to that level, of course, there are gaps missing in your education, and if you don't have the basics, then the rest of it is pretty hard to tackle.

As for the full-time course offered in Jonquière, there's definitely a waiting list for that. You can't just get on that any time you want. In fact, my name was on the waiting list, and I know there are other people whose names are on that waiting list. There are only ten spots available each year. That's because it's a year-long course.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I meant to ask you this as well. Did you say you had a child of school age who had a problem getting into an English-language school?

Ms. Charmaine Sammut: I have three children, two of whom were able to come with me. The other one had to stay in Alberta because she's in her last year of school. Again, the educational systems—this has been mentioned several times before—made it impossible for her to move with us.

As for my two younger children, because we're anglophones and because of the laws restricting English education, the paperwork involved in having your child be entitled to English education is phenomenal. It took me three months to obtain the proper paperwork. You have to order birth certificates. There has to be documentation, proof, of your educational background. The amount of paperwork you have to go through is just staggering.

I moved here six months ago. I applied when I moved here, and I just received the certificates of acceptance for my children for going into the school two weeks ago.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Did your children have a problem moving from one school system to the other, or was it relatively easy?

Ms. Charmaine Sammut: No, there's a definite difference in the school systems between provinces. Both of my children, who have been straight-A students, found it very difficult adjusting to the gap. I know that you know the educational system in Alberta and that we go to grade 12. Here, they have the equivalent of grade 11. So when your children move from Alberta to Quebec, they have to jump a year in their education, so they basically miss a full year, but they have to make that adjustment.

My daughter, who would have been in grade 9 this year in Alberta, is currently in sec 3, which is the equivalent of grade 10 in Quebec. So she's now taking on high school subjects, as opposed to her last year of junior high. as opposed to her last year of junior high.

• 2025

So the integration has been difficult for them, but I think any child moving anywhere in Canada is going to find that. It's not just because we moved to Quebec.

My particular beef with that is the amount of paperwork required.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Do you think children who have a difficult time in school anyway could be really discouraged if they are jumped time and again on a fairly regular basis? This could be extremely discouraging.

Ms. Charmaine Sammut: One of the women who met with me last night has moved eleven times in fourteen years and three times in the last two years. Her son's school work is definitely suffering the consequences.

Ms. Judi Longfield: Mr. Chairman, I understood when we were at the family centre that it was the English-language courses for which there wasn't a waiting list. Maybe there was some confusion with that, with the second language.

On having to leave your daughter in Alberta to go to school, is any financial assistance provided by the military to help offset the cost? You are now out of the province, so I would think that there is a tuition fee, and certainly there are boarding costs.

Ms. Charmaine Sammut: Yes, a subsistence is given to us to help with her living costs.

Ms. Judi Longfield: You say “subsistence”; how much of the actual cost does it really cover?

Ms. Charmaine Sammut: I would say approximately one-half to three-quarters of the cost, but in Quebec it is taxable. It is classified as income.

Ms. Judi Longfield: A deemed taxable benefit?

Ms. Charmaine Sammut: Yes. It's the only province where it is taxed.

Ms. Judi Longfield: They may pay room and board or at least partially cover that, but what about providing you and your husband with the opportunity to visit her or, conversely, for her to visit you? Is there an allowance for that?

Ms. Charmaine Sammut: There is definitely opportunity. They provide two full round trips for the child to travel to the parents' home twice a year.

Ms. Judi Longfield: Is this a commercial flight or do you have to wait for an armed forces flight? How is that arranged?

Ms. Charmaine Sammut: It's a commercial flight. It's up to you to make the reservations.

Ms. Judi Longfield: So you can schedule. That's some consolation.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Ms. Danielle Gilbert.

Ms. Danielle Gilbert (Individual Presentation): Good evening. I also want to talk about education. I just listened to the last speaker and I must say that I fully share her viewpoint. When you come to Quebec, where the education system is completely different from that in the other provinces, your children are often penalized. My daughter was in Manitoba. When she came here, they made her skip a year. She finished her secondary level V and was accepted in Cegep. But once there, they didn't recognized the courses she had taken in Manitoba. She had to register for additional courses. This was shear hell.

I would like to know why the government doesn't try to standardize the education systems of all provinces so that our children aren't penalized every time we have to move. Similarly, for people who are forced to move because of their work, whether they're civilian or military employees, why isn't there legislation to prevent their children from being penalized? Otherwise, the education system changes from one province to the next. When you come here to Quebec, you have to have two years of Cegep, you have to have the credits. I think this is an aberration.

I don't know whether the government could do something, or whether the provincial ministries of Education couldn't get together and decide to standardize education between provinces so that children are not penalized. Thank you.

The Chairman: Ladies and gentlemen, that is the end of my list of speakers. If there are people in the room who would like to take the floor to make other suggestions or comments, I would ask them to do so now.

• 2030

Mr. Éric-Michel Daoust (Individual Presentation): My name is Éric-Michel Daoust. I have a piece of paper here because my memory isn't very good.

Because of various health problems that occurred while I was an air traffic controller during the Gulf War, I have physical and mental problems. I have to take the maximum dose of all medication, regardless of what it is or what it treats.

[English]

I have one question to ask. If the present government is worried about making a decision about the people who were involved in the last gulf war and have health problems that developed from it, is this government now also worried about things heating up again? Perhaps it doesn't want to recognize anything because in the future it will also have to pay for those people who might be involved in the gulf again.

[Translation]

Since I don't have the strength to continue, I would like to introduce my spokesperson, my assistance officer, Ms. Isola Bouchard.

The Chairman: Ms. Bouchard.

Ms. Isola Bouchard (Individual Presentation): Good evening everyone. I'm part of a group of people that you probably very rarely meet. I hope you will pay special attention to us. I'm an assistance officer for veterans.

All of you here are healthy. However, when someone comes back from a mission, his or her health may be affected. Mr. Daoust who is here this evening is living proof of that. He is a Gulf War veteran.

I would like to know whether in the region or in the Department, it would be possible to have military doctors who have been in the field where the war took place and are capable of diagnosing the illnesses that these veterans are suffering from. In civilian life, they know absolutely nothing about this, and the medication these patients are given does not suit them at all.

Yesterday, I went to see a doctor and submitted Mr. Daoust's file to him. This doctor told me that this file didn't help him at all since he did not know anything about that environment or these people.

In Ottawa, there was a hospital that was reserved specifically for Gulf War veterans. I called this hospital or clinic on November 24 and found out that it was closing its doors. I would like to know whether you have kept some of these places, whether in Valcartier or elsewhere, where these patients can be referred.

These patients have memory lapses, they are loosing their hair, they have trouble concentrating, and headaches. Mr. Daoust has headaches that can last 48 to 72 hours, as well as arthritis, because he was posted on a ship. He worked almost ten years as an air traffic controller on a ship. One curious phenomenon right now is that he is like a cat: he sees better in the dark than in light. You can imagine the problems that that causes, in addition to the other physical problems that I mentioned.

Mr. Daoust was 35 on December 26. The doctor who has been treating him for the past six months told him: "Sir, your organism is three times your age." Imagine the dark thoughts that come to him in the morning when he wakes up.

• 2035

I must tell you that one day when I was at his home preparing his file on a computer, he told me: "It's a good thing you're there, because I can assure that I would have been long gone from this earth." Allow me to tell you that this burden is much too heavy for me. Right now, I'm looking after one person. Soon, I will be given two others. So I am yelling "Help!"; I am sending out an SOS.

I want the help of doctors who are able to understand these people. I don't want to deal with civilian doctors because they understand nothing about this and simply conclude that this is a psychiatric problem, because it's certainly not normal. It may not be normal for a civilian, but for a soldier, it is, if you take into account all the medication he takes and the fact that our doctors don't understand anything about this.

I'm therefore sending out an SOS. Can you tell me what's going on with that hospital in Ottawa that took on these veterans and that is apparently closing?

[English]

The Chairman: David, do you have some information?

Mr. David Pratt: I just got some information from the DND staff person here with us with respect to the the National Defence Medical Centre. From what I understand, the centre is closing but there is a Gulf War clinic that will remain open. There are capabilities as well that are being decentralized to some of the other bases across the country. We can certainly have more information on that subject tomorrow.

On the point that was raised by Mr. Daoust earlier in terms of whether anyone is raising the issue of the health of veterans and people who may go to the gulf and then come back, during the debate last night in Parliament, which went very late, Ms. Marlene Catterall, who is the member of Parliament for Ottawa West—Nepean—actually she is in the riding next to my own—raised that very point. She expressed concern for the health of Gulf War veterans and hoped that National Defence would have a plan in place to protect and monitor the health of CF members who may participate in the military action against Iraq. So that issue has certainly been raised in the House of Commons last night.

I can tell you as well that your own statement has certainly driven the point home for the members of the committee. It's something we will certainly be cognizant of in terms of what happens over the course of the coming weeks and perhaps months.

The Chairman: Thank you, David.

[Translation]

Ms. Isola Bouchard: Thank you.

The Chairman: Madam, I would have a brief question to ask you. What kind of support did you receive from the Department of Veterans Affairs?

Ms. Isola Bouchard: Veterans Affairs were a bit useful. They do their share, although they ask for a medical exam. But that's all. It's quite difficult because the doctors cannot understand what state these people are in. You're often told that these are psychiatric cases. But look, they have to get over this psychiatry thing. It is not psychiatry. I am prepared to admit that that may be part of it, but you must not believe that's all there is to it.

I would need a doctor who's able to understand these situations. If there was a clinic in Valcartier, well, we would have to pay for travel from Chicoutimi to Valcartier. But that's besides the point, it will never be easy.

It seems to me that when people come back from war and are really sick, they should be given a basic amount of money, because many of them are incapable of working again even though they're 35 years old, as is the case of Mr. Daoust, who's been declared disabled.

A situation like that is very difficult. I hope I'll get some news, and some clear news, not just a piece of paper.

• 2040

I must tell you that I helped over 200 veterans of World War II for whom I obtained pensions. It was easy in those cases; they were missing an arm, an eye, a leg, which is very visible. But when people are suffering in other ways, this cannot be seen even with X-rays. They are told there's nothing wrong with them. And yet these people are very sick, believe me.

So this is an SOS to you and I really hope that I will receive help rather than have to stir things up and...wait patiently.

[English]

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit, do you have a question?

Mr. Leon Benoit: Madam Bouchard, I was going to ask what the department said, and that's been partially answered. But if the department said when you approached it that the problem is psychiatric—and you say that's part of it, but not all, and it's partly physical—did it offer psychiatric help to at least deal with that part of the problem, or make psychiatric help available?

[Translation]

Mr. Éric-Michel Daoust: It's not the Department of National Defense that offered...

Ms. Isola Bouchard: You're not taking the translation.

Mr. Éric-Michel Daoust: It's the hospitals here.

Ms. Isola Bouchard: It's the hospitals here that... The Department of Veterans Affairs asked that medical exams be done here. But here, people are competent in the civilian area, but not with the military. They don't know where these people are coming from.

Mr. Éric-Michel Daoust: They don't understand what these injections mean.

Ms. Isola Bouchard: No.

Mr. Éric-Michel Daoust: What this means, the civilian doctors don't understand.

Ms. Isola Bouchard: Radio and television stations often provide us with information. They say that British researchers have discovered that the injections they were given destroy the immune system. It's the whole control system that is attacked. So you can imagine the significance of the problem.

Several thousands of Americans are already gone. I hope the Canadians won't go.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: Madam, I would like to talk to you later if I could. I know there are people who have dealt with this issue. I'd at least like to talk to you about it and try to get you in touch with those who have dealt with it before.

[Translation]

Ms. Isola Bouchard: That's very kind of you. Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Ms. Bouchard, another member has a question for you.

[English]

Mr. Pratt.

Mr. David Pratt: On a point of information, Mr. Daoust may be aware of this, but there is a web site on the Internet that deals with people suffering from Gulf War syndrome. It may be helpful to consult that site for information on assistance that may be provided there.

Mr. Éric-Michel Daoust: I appreciate what you suggest. However, a few months ago my modem died and it was a 14.4. I must mention that my income right now is less than one-seventh of what I used to earn when I was in the forces. That places me below the poverty level. But thank you for the offer, sir.

Mr. David Pratt: The other point of information is that I understand the doctor in charge of the Gulf War clinic at NDMC was in the Gulf War himself, so I think he certainly has a high degree of familiarity with the issue.

• 2045

Mr. Éric-Michel Daoust: Where is that officer?

Mr. David Pratt: At NDMC.

Mr. Éric-Michel Daoust: Who will assume the costs, sir, between here and back over there, for consultations?

Mr. David Pratt: I can't answer that question right now. I think we'll perhaps have a bit more information tomorrow in terms of how we get information to veterans like you, who have been in the Gulf War and who are clearly suffering now.

So I can't give you that information right now. I hope it will be here by tomorrow morning.

The Chairman: Thank you, David.

Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: My question is more for the departmental officials. I wonder if any of them would know whether the Gulf War syndrome has actually been recognized as a legitimate sickness.

Has that happened? I don't know the answer to that. If the recognition isn't there, then it's not being treated very seriously, really.

[Translation]

Ms. Isola Bouchard: We at least need doctors who'll have some understanding of this kind of situation, because it's impossible for doctors in civilian environments to provide proper care to these patients.

Mr. Éric-Michel Daoust: They have no idea what it is.

Ms. Isola Bouchard: No.

Mr. Éric-Michel Daoust: They don't know what the "S-5-10" injection is. They don't know the problems we had, the interference, the pills or the injections we got and that just weren't recognized. The doctors on civvy street haven't the foggiest idea what an "S-5-10" injection is.

[English]

They also have no idea what kind of effect on the human body—namely, the central nervous system—the pills have that were given to us in preparation for attacks. Were those pills recognized and tested, for example, by the Canadian government before they were given to us?

[Translation]

The Chairman: Mr. Daoust, we'll be checking out that information and we will get it for tomorrow morning.

Ms. Isola Bouchard: Thank you. Back at the Department, I was told there was a clinic in Valcartier that opened not very long ago and that was especially dedicated to looking after the veterans from the Gulf War. I tried to get in touch with those responsible for it this morning. I didn't manage. I'm going to try again to see what the case is and whether the doctor really knows his stuff concerning the Gulf War.

But rest assured that I will find someone. We won't just stand there and remain insensitive to that gentleman's distress. I'm taking care of two others besides. So we absolutely must...

Mr. Éric-Michel Daoust: Without mentioning the dead.

Ms. Isola Bouchard: The dead don't scream as loud. The families are the ones that have a lot of sorrow. I can assure you that they have very bitter memories but I don't want to get into that here. One of them died a few months after coming back from the war. The other one died in a military hospital. That happened in the Gaspé.

As an assistance officer, I have to help them when they're sick and when things aren't going too well even if they're healthy, and also when they die. So I set up a special cemetery in the Saguenay for the veterans from the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean.

I have to tell you that this morning I phoned the Last Post Fund to know whether the veterans from the Gulf War were eligible. Well, they're not. They're eligible neither for the tombstone nor for funeral expenses. They're considered just like ordinary workers who are not military personnel.

I hope that you'll manage to improve this situation that's catastrophic, to say the least. After all, people who have served in a war, who jeopardized their health either totally or in part, at least deserve that their tombstone and funeral expenses be paid for by the Department.

• 2050

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Madam. We've made good note of your comments.

Jim Temple.

[English]

Mr. Jim Temple (Individual Presentation): I'm a military dependant. Unfortunately, I'm not female, which most seem to be. I don't mind being called a dependant, because I'm not dependent on the military for anything. I should be able to work anywhere in this country I want.

Since my wife has been posted here, I've come from Ontario. In Ontario I'm a licensed mechanic. I can work on cars and heavy trucks. Unfortunately, in Quebec they don't recognize our trade licences. This is something that has to do with the federal government, I believe.

I've sent letters off to Ottawa to find out why they won't recognize it here. They seem to recognize it in every other province, but sometimes I feel as if I'm in another country here. Therefore I guess I am a bit of a military dependant, because I'm dependent on the military to take care of me right now. I don't think that's fair. I think that rather sucks.

The other thing is about the language courses. It's true, you can't get a beginner's course here, whether it's on the base or.... I've tried in La Baie. They have nothing. The same thing in Chicoutimi. They have nothing.

Why they have to have a minimum of 15 people to take a French course is beyond me, if the government's going to pay for it. If 2 people who need the course happen to get transferred in, why can't they do 2? Why not 3? Why not 20? But if they don't have the requisite number of people to take that course, you're out of luck.

Those are the points I wanted to make. Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Mr. Temple, Mr. Benoit has a question.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Actually, it's more of a comment. In the last year and a half of the last parliament I took on a critic's position, dealing with the barriers to interprovincial trade. Some of those barriers are exactly what you're talking about: the lack of transferability of a certificate or a licence from one province to the other.

Mr. Jim Temple: As long as you have an interprovincial seal. I have that. It doesn't make any difference.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes. In some commodities and in movement of people with professional certificates and so on there are more barriers to trade between provinces than there are between Canada and the United States.

Mr. Jim Temple: Also, somebody who is from Quebec and who has a trade licence can go to Ontario and be picked up right away. I think I'm getting the short end of the stick when I come here.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes. I think part of the answer to that is that the federal government has the responsibility to ensure no barriers to trade between provinces build up. In fact, they have neglected that responsibility for some time, namely the last 100 years. Now, because we have freer trade between Canada and the United States, it really shows up, when you can move your certificate or your licence from Canada to the United States easier than you can to another province.

Mr. Jim Temple: The States don't have licensing set-ups. They have only just started to bring something in for licensing during the last 6 to 10 years. But if you're Canadian and you go down there, they snap you up. They will pay you anything you want, basically, because we have a top-of-the-line training system up here, for apprentices through to journeymen. Unfortunately, within our country itself we're done for.

By the way, the federal government puts out a brochure explaining how free you are to move from one province to the other if you have your interprovincial seal; it doesn't matter what the trade is. Somebody needs to rewrite that, I think.

Mr. Leon Benoit: It's not the case now, and it's something that has to be dealt with. The industry minister, Mr. Manley, has expressed a real concern about this and has said he will do something to improve it. But it has been four years. Something has to be done.

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce and many provincial chambers of commerce have taken this issue on and they are really pushing the issue. Also, some organizations are doing what they can to try to get this changed. It doesn't help you right now.

• 2055

Mr. Jim Temple: I don't expect to get a job overnight; that's one thing. My lack of French is going to hold me back here. But at least if they would just recognize my licence, I would feel better.

I have 20 years in the trade, and then I get told, sorry, you're no good here. Where our apprenticeship in Ontario is 5 years or 10,000 hours, it's only 3 years here and 7,000 hours. So there's something lacking. We have just as many wheels fall off in Ontario as they have here.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chairman: Mr. Pratt, do you have a comment?

Mr. David Pratt: As someone who lives very close to the border of Ontario and Quebec, Mr. Temple, I can tell you that we encounter that problem a lot more than you think, in terms of the number of people affected. The biggest problem I've seen thus far is with the province of Quebec, in terms of their recognition.

Mr. Benoit is right. Mr. Manley, the Minister of Industry, has been working on this issue over the last number of years, and he has made some progress in certain areas. One of the problems we have is that the province of Ontario doesn't seem to be willing, quite frankly, to put up the same barriers the province of Quebec has, because if that happened and the flow of workers from Quebec to Ontario was stopped on the basis of qualifications, then I think we'd have some fairly quick action on the part of the Government of Quebec. But that has not happened, and some of us at the federal level are caught betwixt and between here, between these two provinces that are having their own problems in terms of recognition of standards, and I think it's important certainly to raise the point.

I'm glad that particular issue is going to be part of the record or the transcripts of this hearing, because it will certainly serve as a reminder for us to deal with that, and the whole education issue as well, in terms of cross-border provincial relations.

Thank you.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Ms. Venne.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: I'd simply like Mr. Benoit to answer my colleague because apparently Quebec is not the worst province. I wouldn't want us to be blamed for everything and I would like Mr. Benoit to give us an explanation.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes, I will, Mr. Chairman, very briefly, because I know we're here to hear people's concerns.

I'll very quickly say, that's right, there are some problems in Quebec recognizing certificates and licences. Actually, British Columbia and Saskatchewan have more barriers to trade between provinces than with Quebec, but this particular one is a problem in Quebec. I recognize that.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Madam.

Ms. Nancy Gonthier (Individual Presentation): Good evening. I'm Nancy Gonthier. I work at the multiservice centre as daycare educator and I'm married to a serviceman.

I'm here tonight because of a very important point having to do with my work. Presently, the daycare centre is not recognized by the Office de garde du Québec, which means we can't offer quality services to military personnel. You know that in Quebec, there are a lot of problems with daycare. There are rather long waiting lists. Members of the armed forces posted here need daycare they can use.

Our problem is that Quebec says that we're on federal ground so we don't have any right to get provincial subsidies. That doesn't make our job easier. I'd simply like you to mention to the Quebec government that members of the armed forces pay provincial taxes, just as all Canadian citizens do, and so they should have a right to the same services.

My second point has something to do with what Ms. Venne pointed out before which is that the government doesn't give enough support to the members of its armed forces. That's nothing new. What I deplore is what I often hear from civvy street which, apparently, doesn't know anything at all about the work done by the members of the armed forces. A lot of people think that our members work only 8 to 4, don't do much and have extraordinary salaries and benefits. But it's a whole other story in 1998.

• 2100

My husband is an F-18 pilot on the base. People have often told me that I mustn't have any money problems because my husband must earn at least a $100,000 a year. If he earned $100,000 a year, you can be sure I wouldn't be here tonight.

My husband has been an F-18 pilot for 10 years. I didn't want to address this point tonight, but after hearing the other presentations, I think I will speak to it because it seems to me it is the things we experience that we are in the best position to talk about.

He recently put in his request for release. Over the last two weeks at Bagotville, five pilots have done the same thing and many others will follow. I'd like to explain why. When I met my husband, five years ago, he told me that he'd never be a pilot in civilian life because it would be like driving a bus. He always said that he'd never do that. But he's been thinking about it for two years now and he's finally asked for his release.

What you have are 10-hour working days, flight time has gone from 180 to 220 hours a year and there's work overload. Of course, there's also the money aspect. I'll give you an example. Soon they're going to be leaving for Norway and they're going to be living on a base with room and board, of course, but they'll also be getting about $6 a day allowance. I don't know if you know how much it costs for a 30-minute phone call from Norway to Chicoutimi, but I think it's going to be much more than whatever amount he'll be getting.

On the salary side, there's a big disappointment. Their superiors promise them benefits, bonuses or increases, but that's always for next year. I know now that the date has been set, April 1, and that a proposal has gone to Treasury Board. I can tell you that a lot of pilots are waiting for that date before making a decision about their careers.

I don't know if you know that in civilian life, my husband could double his salary in five years just doing the same thing; not the same work, but the same profession.

It costs $5 million to train a pilot. I wonder why the government can't see that it would be far less expensive to increase salaries than to continually train new pilots. It seems to me that it's only logical and self-evident.

I heard Ms. Venne's suggestion. The work of an F-18 pilot isn't just getting a plane off the ground and landing it again. It's far more complex. There's military knowledge involved, combat strategy, weaponry and all kinds of other stuff I know nothing about myself.

The chairman's suggestion of a 10-year contract might be a solution, but I have to tell you that it's the pilots with 10 to 15 years experience that are leaving the Canadian Armed Forces simply because in civilian life you need 1,200 hours flight time and a civil aviation license to be able to become an airline pilot. And as the pilots with 10 to 15 years seniority are the ones with enough hours in the air, I don't think that solution would settle this problem. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Madam.

Madam, Mr. Benoit has a question.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: Because you're in that situation of your husband making a decision on whether to stay on as a pilot in the military or not, I'd like to ask you to prioritize, to tell me maybe the number one reason why your husband will leave the air force. And tell me the number two reason if you can.

[Translation]

Ms. Nancy Gonthier: It's a bit hard to answer that question for him and prioritize all his reasons.

• 2105

There's certainly the matter of the salary. He's going to have 20 years service in 10 years and it will be pre-retirement or even retirement then and I don't think that with the retirement fund we have we'll be able to raise our three children, buy a house and pay for their education. So he'll have to find new work elsewhere. Right now, there are a lot of openings on the civilian side. I think the financial matter is the first concern.

The second, I think, would be the working conditions that have changed since he first signed on with the Canadian Armed Forces. He has a lot less time for his passion which is flying the plane because there's too much work, courses to be followed and all kinds of other stuff to do. He has a lot less time than before for flying and the hours were cut back because of budget constraints.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: Just one follow-up question. You said salary is certainly the number one problem, but then you went on to say that at this salary you can't expect a reasonable retirement, or something along that line. Is the more important factor the retirement, the fact that the retirement just won't be one that's acceptable to both of you, or is it really salary right now?

[Translation]

Ms. Nancy Gonthier: For the time being, it's the salary. But that will certainly have an influence on the amount of the pension that will be coming in rather soon, because it's only 10 years from now.

I'm 25 and my husband is 34 and we have young children. Ten years from now, we'll still have to have a certain lifestyle because we won't be ready to retire yet. If we had a higher salary, we might perhaps be able to put a bit of money aside, pay off the mortgage or buy things that we could use later on and then we'd be able to live rather well off a pension.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

[Translation]

Ms. Nancy Gonthier: I'm sorry. I would like to add something. I don't want to denigrate anyone at all because in the Canadian Armed Forces, everyone gives his all at work and everybody is just about in the same situation. Thank you.

Some Honourable Members: Thank you.

The Chairman: One last witness for tonight.

Mr. Ghislain Pépin (Individual Presentation): My name is Ghislain Pépin and I'd like to talk about the pension fund. I'm a junior agent and I already have 16 years in the armed forces.

Now you know that the salary paid to juniors isn't all that high. We have to try to put money away in RRSPs because our salaries aren't high enough. But it's very hard to find enough money to buy RRSPs because our salary isn't very high.

In my case, my wife can't work. We come from Ontario. Over there, she couldn't work because of language. When we got here, it was the same thing. She can't work. With two children at home, that's rather hard.

As for the junior rank's pension fund, I'll be getting about $1,000 a month when I retire in four years. Unless I'm mistaken, somebody on welfare doesn't get a lot less than I do but I'll have given over 20 years service to the Department of Defence. It's a bit hard to take because I'm still young. We're not like the US, here. A member of the Canadian Forces isn't like a member of the American Forces who can get his release and a job right away. Canadian Forces personnel aren't viewed as well on the outside, although technicians might find good opportunities.

Because of the budget cuts that led to a decrease in Canadian Forces personnel, there haven't been any promotions and that means that in junior ranks, like for the rest of the forces, 60% of the members can't expect to get an opportunity for promotion. In my opinion, the juniors are the ones that are getting the least in terms of a pension after 20 years of service. After 20 years of service, in terms of our pension fund, we wind up with a kick in the arse and $1,000 a month. That's my point of view.

• 2110

The Chairman: Thank you very much. I'll allow a last witness to have a word because apparently he won't be able to be here tomorrow.

Mr. Antoine Boudreault (Individual Presentation): No, because I'm working.

Good evening, gentlemen, good evening, ladies. I'd like to know if you have any executive power in Ottawa. Do you have any decision-making power? Will your recommendations change anything? That's what I want to know.

The Chairman: Mr. Boudreault, we don't have any decision-making power. Our power is limited to making recommendations. I can however tell you that the minister is anxiously awaiting the tabling of our report and I have high hopes that a good portion of our recommendations will be implemented. To answer you quite frankly, we have no decision-making power.

Mr. Antoine Boudreault: Did any other studies undertaken by military personnel, by the Canadian Armed Forces or by any other organization precede your own? Are those studies simply gathering dust on a shelf somewhere?

The Chairman: You have to be careful. We're not a committee that answers to the Minister of National Defence. We're a parliamentary committee.

I was given to understand at the beginning that certain groups of people from the department had gone around and asked just about the same questions as we are. To be frank with you, I don't know what happened to those reports at all. I do want to emphasize that once our report is written, it will be tabled in the House of Commons and then forwarded to the minister.

Mr. Antoine Boudreault: Thank you very much.

[English]

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit, a very, very short comment.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Sir, I would like to give you the opposition view on what happens with committees like this. I want to start by saying that I think the chairman has been quite accurate and quite honest with you. There have been parliamentary committees in the past—there have been many of them—that have been acted on to some degree, but very limited. I do want to say that I believe the intentions of everybody on this committee, no matter what political party they're from, are good.

I think the report will probably be a good reflection of what we've heard. Whether it will be acted on is a whole other issue, and I would like to say that I hope there is a change on the part of government and that the recommendations of this committee are taken seriously. We won't know, though, until three or four years down the road.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Mr. Pratt.

Mr. David Pratt: Perhaps I could make an additional comment on this. I would certainly hope the government acts on this before three or four years down the road. I think the situation is such that we would want to see things happening very, very quickly. As a matter of fact, I know the minister's level of interest, as the chairman said, is extremely high and we may very well see initiatives taken before the report is finalized. I hope this will be the case. I can't guarantee that; I don't know what the minister is thinking.

Let me just say as well that with a parliamentary committee like this, we represent various parts of the country, we come from different backgrounds, different sorts of political philosophies, different approaches, but one thing I do know about parliamentary committees is that when they speak with one voice, they have considerably more influence on the government than if they splinter up and go in different directions.

That would be one thing I would encourage you folks to watch for, whether or not that happens with this committee, because I think it would be counter-productive.

• 2115

[Translation]

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

I would like to thank everyone who came here tonight. As you know, we will resume work tomorrow at 8 a.m. Thank you.

The meeting is adjourned.