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]

Monday, March 30, 1998

• 1404

[English]

The Chairman (Mr. Robert Bertrand (Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, Lib.)): Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to welcome you this afternoon to these SCONDVA meetings. As you are probably all aware, we are travelling around to different bases to get opinions and suggestions on how to improve the quality of life for Canadian Forces personnel.

• 1405

During the previous sessions, if anybody had a presentation to make, we asked them to go to either microphone to make their presentation, and we then had a short session of questions and answers with the members of the committee. I presume this is also the way we will be operating this afternoon.

Without any further ado, I will call the first witness, Master Corporal Lucy Critch-Smith.

Master Corporal Lucy Critch-Smith (Individual Presentation): Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My concerns mostly have to do with the Department of Veterans Affairs. I have seven points, and I hope that's not too many.

First of all, I'd like to give you a little bit of background. Due to my husband's disability, we've been dealing with DVA for the last eight years, as well as the three years prior to those, before he was released to the military. Overall, it's been eleven years.

I'll now get to my points.

First, eligible peacetime veterans are not put in pay at the time of disability. If a service member is disabled while on a UN tour, a UN pension is given immediately; however, for peacetime regular military force members here in Canada, if you're disabled while you're on duty, you don't get a pension until you're actually released from the military. I'm wondering why there is that difference.

Second, the length of time between release date and receipt of a DVA pension is way too long. Most cases take an average of eight months to one year before a pension is determined. Within this timeframe, members rely on a combination of SISIP benefits if they have them, and the CF pension based on 75% of a member's pay at time of release. Often this rate of pay is not enough to sustain a family for a long period of time. However, DVA pensions don't normally come through with an accurate assessment until sometimes as many as two to three years after release.

Third, obvious disabilities should be assessed closest to the appropriate percentage as soon as possible. For instance, a pensioner is initially assessed at 40% interim. His rate is raised to 50% before appeals or after appeals, and it's later raised to 90% over a span of five years, eight years or whatever. However, the disability remains the same at the time of release.

With reference to my husband, eight years after his release, he's finally receiving 100% disability, with the same disability that he had when released from the military. It has taken eight years to get from 40% to 100%. That's way too long. It's too stressful. It's just so very frustrating dealing with the red tape. Once the file gets to headquarters at Charlottetown, it seems like it just gets stuck in somebody's basket or gets lost in the shuffle.

Fourth, pensioners are often faced with a lack of available information. For instance, I've been dealing with DVA for eleven years, but I just found out about EIA now. My husband is now receiving it, but it has take eleven years to find out about it. Why wasn't I told this before? We've dealt with counsellors in Ottawa, St. John's, Toronto, and now Kingston. We've gone through four different offices, and we're only finally starting to get this information now. I've talked to other pensioners and this lack of information seems to be one of the biggest problems. We're not given that information, and it seems like we're just— I don't know the word. It's just so frustrating because we don't know.

• 1410

As well, with lack of available information, advice on eligibilities is normally given when such needs arise, but at that point it just takes so long. It takes months for the prerequisite physician statement, the medicals, and all the paperwork a member has to go through. It just takes so long for the file to end up getting on somebody's desk so they can say, “Yes, okay, we're going to make an agreement” or “We're going to come to a decision on this”. If we knew about this information prior to—

The Chairman: Could I just ask you what EIA stands for?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Extra incapacitated allowance.

The Chairman: I'm sorry. Okay, keep on going.

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Thank you.

Once an attendance allowance assessment has been done in the home, another assessment or a follow-up of six months to one year should be done.

As well, with the EIA, assessments are based on the date of the application, but they're not retroactive to the date of disability. They should be retroactive to the date of disability. The member has been suffering or dealing with that disability over a certain period of time, sometimes years. In our case we only found out about it after 11 years of dealing with DVA, and the retroactive pay was only to November of last year, when we found out about it through Dr. Hughs in Kingston, who recommended it. I would never have known about it if he hadn't mentioned it to me. It's just such a lack of information for us.

The prioritizing of veterans should be based on the pensioner's disability, not the timeframe in which the disability occurred. I've found in dealing with DVA over the past years that basically the counsellor's mindset is: World War I vets get top priority, World War II vets get second priority, Korean vets get third priority, and if there's time for us, then they'll look at us. By “us” I mean regular force, peacetime military members. That seems to be the mindset of a lot of the counsellors.

For some of the people it's been changing, I've noticed, in the last three years, but over the last seven years, it's been, “Yeah, okay, we'll get to you when we do”.

I have one point with regard to the military. The guaranteed home sale is not extended to retired members with 20 years of service. I'd like to know why, if we retire after 20 years of service, that plan is not extended to us.

Thank you.

The Chairman: If you could hang on a minute, I'm just going to see if anybody has any questions for you.

Monsieur Benoit.

Mr. Leon E. Benoit (Lakeland, Ref.): I would just like to ask you to give a bit of an explanation of what happened and what it meant to your family, having all of these delays in the process.

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Well, it's just so frustrating.

There are a lot of phone calls. You're always making phone calls. You're always being told they don't know what's happening with your file, they don't know where your file is, or your file is being looked at. How long does it take to look at a file? Does it take two years? Does it take six months? It's always three months, six months, eight months. It's never three weeks or a month. It's so frustrating.

You can't sleep. You're stressed out. You can't eat. You get physically sick, or at least I do. I get physically sick. When it gets to the point that I have to phone the DVA with regard to especially a new condition, a pensionable condition, I just get nauseous, because I know I'm going to be on the phone for days and days and days. I feel like I get the runaround a lot.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Do you think they're actually that disorganized, or is there some other reason that things are apparently disorganized and as slow as they are?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Well, the counsellors I deal with, especially here in Kingston, have been super people. They're very nice; they're friendly; they're compassionate; they're thoughtful. They return my calls. They're excellent when it comes to dealing with people; they have a lot of really good people skills.

• 1415

I find that once the file gets to headquarters in Charlottetown, it gets lost in the shuffle. I don't know if that's because there's such a massive workload, with only so many people to do the job and a certain period of time to get it done, but it's very frustrating. The hang-up seems to be once it gets to Charlottetown.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Have they ever given any indication why these delays are always there and why you can count on having to be on the phone for days, as you've put it, to get anything done?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Basically they tell you the file is being looked at, the MO hasn't taken a look at it yet, the MO hasn't come to a decision, or your file has not been looked at yet because other cases take priority. I understand that other cases take priority, but how many cases take priority that it takes six months or a year before a decision is reached?

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chairman: Mr. Wood.

Mr. Bob Wood (Nipissing, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Let me try to get this straight in my mind. How did this all start? When your husband was disabled, was there any support system in place where you could talk to someone? Did the commanding officer get involved at the unit where you were?

We've heard lots of horror stories on our trips and this is obviously another one. It's kind of unbelievable you had to find out about these things later. Can you take us through that, if it isn't too much trouble? Just take your time.

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Sure. My husband was serving with the airborne regiment. He was a jump instructor at CAC in Edmonton. In the summertime he worked as an MOI, a mountain operations instructor, so he taught mountain climbing.

In the latter part of 1986 he had a mountain climbing accident. There was an avalanche and he fell. They were up 1,200 feet and he fell 55 feet. He was unconscious and ended up spending three years at the National Defence Medical Centre as a patient.

Throughout those three years, because we weren't married at the time, the military just looked at me as a girlfriend, but it did give me a lot of information and counselling. I had to deal with somebody with a severe injury. My husband had to learn how to read, write, walk, and talk— basically how to do everything all over again.

The military was really great to us. The doctors and therapists were excellent. Mr. Marinacci was notified in 1988 or 1989 of my husband's case.

Mr. Bob Wood: Who is that?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Mr. Eric Marinacci was with the Department of Veterans Affairs in Ottawa. We were in Ottawa at the time. Mr. Marinacci set the paperwork in motion to try to have his CVA pension at least started before he was released from the military. We were told the military would rehabilitate him to the point where he couldn't be rehabilitated any further, and once he was rehabilitated to the maximum he would be released. It took three years as a patient at NDMC before that was achieved. By the time he was released he was given an interim assessment of 40%.

Mr. Bob Wood: This is the one where you said it went from 40% to 50% to 90%?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Yes, sir. He was given 40% for about eight months, then it went to 50%, and then the appeals started. From there it went to 90%. It has been at 90% for five or six years. Then just this year I requested a reassessment of his disability and it went to 100%.

• 1420

Mr. Bob Wood: So all this time you've been operating by yourself.

As soon as your husband got his release he was dropped by the military?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Yes, sir.

Mr. Bob Wood: Then he had to find out through all this other stuff, through DVA—

And this extra, would you say it's in EIA? You didn't get any information on that at all?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: No, sir. I didn't know about EIA until just before Christmas this year.

Mr. Bob Wood: This year?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Yes, sir. My husband was asked by Dr. Hughs, who's the DVA doctor in Kingston, to go back to see him. He had to go to see Dr. Hughs. Dr. Hughs wanted to reassess his file. I made some phone calls to the Kingston office and asked that Herb be reassessed and Dr. Hughs contacted us. I took Herb out for him to be reassessed, and at that point Dr. Hughs told me he felt Herb should have been receiving 100% from the day he was disabled— at least from the day he was released. He also told me he should have been receiving EIA, and I didn't even know what EIA was. I didn't even know it existed. I knew about an attendant's allowance and the different grades they have, but I wasn't aware of EIA.

I phoned Maureen Piette at DVA in Kingston and I asked questions with regard to the retroactive pay. She told me that even though Dr. Hughs had recommended that the pay be retroactive to the date of the disability or the date of the release, it wasn't. It was only retroactive to the date that I put in the application, which was November 1997.

Mr. Bob Wood: I don't know if you can answer this, but do you know if this is a practice of DVA's not to tell anybody about this? Do you know of any other cases? Do you have any knowledge of anything like that?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Yes, I do, sir. I've talked to at least four other people. Lack of information is so widespread, it's a sin.

Mr. Bob Wood: Yes, I know.

How much money are we talking about? Maybe I'm out of line here, but I wonder if they're not giving anybody the information because they're afraid it's going to cost a few bucks.

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: I think that's what it is. I think they look at the fact that especially for retroactive pay they're looking at a fair amount of money. I was told by Kingston, by Ms. Piette, that a new policy had come out with regard to the retroactive pay and the policy now was that it would only be retroactive to the date the application was initially submitted as opposed to the date of the disability or the date of release from the military, regardless of what the DVA doctor recommended.

Mr. Bob Wood: Where does it all stand now?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: In July 1997, last year, my husband received two hearing aids as a consequence of his head injury, his loss of hearing in both ears.

Mr. Bob Wood: Did he have to buy them or were they supplied?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: We had to buy them. I put in a claim for new conditions and it's still sitting on someone's desk somewhere.

When he was released, he was released with a head injury; his right arm was busted; there was his hearing; and he's going for double knee surgery starting in June.

Mr. Bob Wood: Who's going to have to pay for that?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: We are.

Mr. Bob Wood: Is there anything else you can think of? It's a pretty wild story.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I would like to get a little bit more information from you. Your husband is up to 100% of what he's eligible for or on 100% disability now. What percentage is that of the pay he was getting at the time he was injured?

• 1425

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: He was a sergeant, and when he got released he had the LTD SISIP— long term disability. So SISIP kicked in, and they paid up to 75% of his pay until the DVA pension took over. Once the DVA pension exceeded the 75% of his military pension plus the SISIP benefits combined, then SISIP stopped and DVA took over.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I'm just trying to get a bit of an idea of what that meant for you in terms of your standard of living— the change from your husband earning a salary to living on this disability. Plus, you've mentioned already having to pay for the hearing aids, and my guess is that would be $700 apiece, something in that range, at least—

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: It was $1,500.

Mr. Leon Benoit: For the two of them?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Yes, sir.

Mr. Leon Benoit: As well as the other expenses you've had to cover— How have you managed, and how does the compensation or the disability he's receiving now compare to what you were living on?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Well, because he's receiving the disability pension, his DVA pension is not taxed. He's also receiving Canada Pension Plan, although Canada Pension Plan and his military disability pensions are both taxed. With those three pensions combined, he's exceeding the rate of pay that he had when he was in the military. So our standard of living, if anything, has probably increased. It's gone up.

My issue is not the standard of living we have with his disability; my issue is how long it takes for the paperwork to go through DVA.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Right. Okay. Thank you.

The Chairman: Mr. Wood, you had a question.

Mr. Bob Wood: I have one more question, just about your personal career. You're a master corporal?

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: Yes, I am, sir.

Mr. Bob Wood: How does that work? Does your husband require constant care? I'm trying to figure out what happens if you get posted somewhere.

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: I'm a traffic tech, and I work at 2 Air Movement Squadron, which is basically the military airport. Next April I will be going to Alert for six months. I volunteered for that position. I don't feel my career should have to suffer because of my husband's disability, and I would like to further my career as much as I can. My husband supports me in that 100%.

Arrangements have been made so that he can either stay with my family or his family. If he wants to remain in our home, arrangements have been made for friends to come in and stay with him, or for him to spend the night with friends. I can't leave him alone overnight. If I do, my house insurance is not covered.

He cannot get life insurance. SISIP gave him coverage after release, until he reaches the age of 65. After he reaches the age of 65, he has no life insurance. We recently bought a house, two years ago, on our posting here, and we can't get life insurance for him on our mortgage. So after the age of 65 he has no insurance, and I can't leave him alone.

I keep in touch with him throughout the day by phone, or he calls me. If I were to go away, he would stay with family or friends. I would have to have somebody take care of our bank book, especially when I'm going to Alert, because he can't write a cheque or balance a book. Any personal administration I would have to have somebody come in and do.

Mr. Bob Wood: Thank you very much.

MCpl Lucy Critch-Smith: You're welcome.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Master Corporal Irene Witty.

Master Corporal Irene Witty (Individual Presentation): Good afternoon. I just wanted to sympathize with the first speaker, because my father is going through problems right now with DVA. I was making notes as she was speaking. In fact, he might even be here tonight.

This morning I spoke with the Honourable Judi Longfield, and I did mention some things about the military medical system and how I believe it's failing members of the military. I know that with cutbacks and that sort of thing, our medical care is being handed out to civilian personnel.

• 1430

Three years ago my son was born and I was in Cold Lake, Alberta, as a single parent. When you are pregnant you are entitled to see a civilian doctor. After the child is born you have one appointment with that doctor and then you are back into the military system again.

I was suffering from clinical depression, post-partum depression. I saw a psychiatrist, a social worker, and a doctor who was leaving for Haiti a week later, and I wasn't diagnosed. The padre who was in Cold Lake at the time was Padre Schurman. He was the one who said I was suffering from clinical depression and had me go in and see the doctor, who was leaving for Haiti the next week, so I didn't get any follow-up care.

When I was posted here, I didn't know I had clinical depression because doctors were telling me that I was fine, that I was seeing a psychiatrist, and that maybe I should just get over it. These were military psychiatrists. I saw a social worker and he was upset because the military was going to get rid of social workers and keep padres, so I was inundated with their problems, not my problem. The psychiatrist didn't get the FRP, so he was upset, and of course me being a single parent, I didn't get the FRP— maybe I shouldn't be upset either.

When I got here to Trenton I thought, “Okay. I'm here. My parents live here. I have some help.” Within six months I wasn't going to work. I was phoning in sick. I was very rude and very abrupt with people on the floor. My supervisor did finally pull me aside and ask me what was going on, on the same day I had a medical appointment with a doctor and a social worker appointment, which I made myself because I knew there were problems.

When I went to see the medical doctor here on base, he wasn't interested in hearing about my problem at the time. He suggested that I see the duty medical officer. That afternoon I went to see the social worker and she got me over to see the medical doctor. I was fortunate enough that the social worker and the doctor at that time realized I was having clinical depression and I was taken care of.

What it comes down to is the inconsistency of the medical care that we receive in the military. We don't have the opportunity to see the same doctors again. They don't have the opportunity to see if there are continuing problems that could be taken care of. Personally, I feel my career has suffered over the past years because of these problems— if I had a career —but that's another story.

I just feel that being a military member and possibly going into the provincial health care of the area we are in, maybe we could have the consistency of having the same doctor— even though I came here and I couldn't get a family doctor for my son because doctors weren't taking new patients, which is a problem on the civilian side of it.

Basically that's it. I hope to see the military medical system change. I know our doctors are on a lot of deployments and that the consistency isn't there, but as for the attitude of Canada going to a two-tiered health system, I believe we already have it. We have it in the military. It's the second tier. I don't believe we receive the same kind of quality care and consistent care that our counterparts on Civvy Street do. That was my one point.

I have 20 years in the military, and in that 20 years I've probably seen 40 doctors. As a female needing to have certain examinations every year, I've had enough male doctors and that sort of thing. I do realize that here on this base Major Courchesne is looking at getting a women's health centre on the base, which is a plus, but I think more could be done as far as the overall health care of military members.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Bob.

Mr. Bob Wood: We heard this morning from LCol Romanow, I believe, that there are only two doctors on the base and one operating clinic.

MCpl Irene Witty: On this base?

Mr. Bob Wood: Yes.

MCpl Irene Witty: No. I believe there are more doctors on this base.

A voice: If I may—

Mr. Bob Wood: Yes.

A voice: Our establishment says we have five but I only have two on foot.

Mr. Bob Wood: I just put down “medical care not adequate, two doctors on base, only a clinic”.

Lieutenant Colonel M.L. Romanow (8th Wing Administration Officer, Canadian Forces Base Trenton): There are two doctors on base at any one time, although if you go and complain about it they'll show you that the books say you have five. The other three are off somewhere and they don't know that. And yes, we closed our hospital on December 1 and now have only a medical clinic on base.

Mr. Bob Wood: I don't know if anybody can answer this. Has there been any talk of contracting out some medical work? I think in Kingston they contract out.

• 1435

LCol M.L. Romanow: We do here too.

Mr. Bob Wood: Oh, you do?

LCol M.L. Romanow: Most specialist work is contracted out. The first time you go to see a doctor, it's usually a military doctor, but our hospital here, under the direction of Lieutenant-Commander Courchesne, is excellent. She searches actively for specialists you need to see.

The problem is the lack of availability of specialists in the local area. It is not unusual to travel to Quebec, Toronto, or Ottawa to find even a civilian specialist. I forget the specific specialist, a fairly commonly required one, but the last one just moved out of the local area, and the closest one is in Oshawa.

Military members get reimbursed for their mileage for travelling to see these doctors, but it takes an inordinate amount of time and is horribly inconvenient if you're sick. And there is no reimbursement under the Ontario health care for families having to travel to see these people.

Mr. Bob Wood: Would any of that have helped you, Corporal?

MCpl Irene Witty: No, because when I was in Cold Lake—

Not every base has a psychiatrist. I don't know if I was fortunate or not to see the psychiatrist. But no, it didn't have anything to do with me, because a social worker was there, a doctor was there, and a psychiatrist was there.

As for the clinical depression I had, what I was saying is if I had had the opportunity to see the doctor who cared for me during my pregnancy, if I had been able to see him consistently after my son was born, possibly he could have picked it up.

My parents drove me to Bonnyville emergency because I was a mess. It's only when I got here that I decided my son deserved better than a psycho mom, because I was.

The military doctors, the military medical system, did not pick that up, because I had seen countless doctors. As I said, a padre came to my house and spoke with me, and he's the one who wanted me to go see a doctor. Of course a week later he was in Haiti, so there was no follow-up with him. And as I said, between the psychiatrist and the social worker and their personal problems, I didn't get the help I needed.

I have to say, with the social worker here, Susan Bailey, and with Dr. MacDonald, I was treated right away. I have to laugh because I know there are individuals on this base who are on anti-depressants— and maybe this goes back to the morale in the military; an awful lot of people may be on anti-depressants —and when I happened to mention that to my mother, she said, “Well, when your father was in the military, they just gave you a bottle of beer, and now they give you a bottle of anti-depressants”. I don't know if that says anything about the morale of the military or not.

I know my father, getting back to Veterans Affairs and what he's going through now— there are things— As I said, hopefully he'll be back.

In the medical system, lack of consistency is the biggest thing. For me personally, things are going much better now and I have a lot of time to progress in the military, I hope. We'll see what happens. Hopefully someone else doesn't have to go through three years of living hell until they get the proper help they need.

Mr. Bob Wood: Thank you.

MCpl Irene Witty: You're welcome.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Janice Quade.

Master Corporal Janice Quade (Individual Presentation): Hello. My issue is with the child care facility on the base. It's very poor quality. It's actually four portables stuck together. It leaks. It doesn't promote independence, and having a son with special needs, that's one of his main goals.

The staff are wonderful, but the environment really needs to be changed. They need a new centre. The one they have needs to be demolished and rebuilt. There are no trees on the property. There's no grass for the children. The sign out front is dilapidated; you can't even read the sign. I would just like it rebuilt.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Are there any questions for Ms. Quade?

Mr. Wood.

Mr. Bob Wood: Do you know whether or not this is on a priority list, to have anything done to this day care?

• 1440

MCpl Janice Quade: I have asked board members who run the family resource centre on the base and apparently it is not a core requirement. I talked to someone from Ottawa who came to discuss quality of life, I think it was, back in the fall. He said, oh yes, there is money. I tried to go through the proper channels. I don't know where to start to build the new centre.

Mr. Bob Wood: In our briefing notes here it says a number of measures have been taken at the base to improve quality of life. It goes on to say that over $1.5 million was spent on various initiatives: renovation of a gym; purchase of physical equipment; construction of a new ecumenical chapel— probably everything that is needed. But I just wonder—

MCpl Janice Quade: The chapel is gorgeous.

Mr. Bob Wood: I wonder if a new child care centre is on the agenda for the future.

MCpl Janice Quade: Not that I'm aware of. There are over 100 children who go through that door every morning and they are there for ten hours a day. The chapel is used for three hours on Sunday. It doesn't seem to balance. I know different money is spent for different things.

There's a huge walkway that was built, and there's a tunnel 500 feet away from it over Highway 2. I just don't see why— There are certain things that would make my life and the lives of other families on the base so much better— even sidewalks to get to the family resource centre, to get to the new pool. Two cars can't even pass.

I'm on a different topic, but—

Mr. Bob Wood: How many children would use that?

MCpl Janice Quade: Right now, there are 114 children using that centre part-time. It's the only centre that will take your child on a very part-time basis and will coordinate with your husband's work or your work. You can give them a list of times you require care and they will facilitate you, whereas at other centres you're there Tuesday and Thursday mornings, and whether you need that care then or not, you pay for it.

Mr. Bob Wood: Thanks.

The Chairman: Is this a recent problem, or has it been ongoing for years?

MCpl Janice Quade: I've only been on this base for less than three years, but I assume the centre has been there for many, many years. It's very rundown, and as I said, it's not even a real building; it's portables, stuck together.

There's one more thing. There is no office for the administrator there, so when I go to discuss very private matters about my son, all the other parents and staff there hear my problems and things that concern my son. There is no privacy or confidentiality. I find that very annoying as well.

Mr. Bob Wood: Are there a number of special needs children involved? How many would there be?

MCpl Janice Quade: At the one centre, at this centre, I believe there are at least six children who have a label, a diagnosis, and another four or five children at risk who don't have a specific label but may have a behavioural problem.

Mr. Bob Wood: Thanks.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Dawn Wheeler.

Leading Seaman Dawn Wheeler (Individual Presentation): In addition to Master Corporal Witty talking about the medical care, there was an article in the personnel newsletter, Question Corner, that kind of adds to it, and I was going to bring it up.

The question was that with the increasing female personnel, there's not always a female gynaecologist available. The reply was, well, get used to it, because if you have a male doctor, you're probably going to discuss the stuff he is uncomfortable with as well, and hopefully you have developed a rapport with your doctor over the year that you've seen him. Unfortunately, you don't get the same doctor every time. I just found out that there are generally only two on staff, and that makes sense.

My husband was injured in June 1996, which was during a posting season— doctors coming and going, taskings —and in three months he saw eight different doctors. That led to a problem in his treatment. He was either repeatedly treated with stuff that had already happened or there was a delay in treatment because this new doctor wanted to try something else.

He had a crushed foot, so that wasn't hard to miss. But he also had an injured back, and it took almost two and a half years to find out that he had actually cracked his back.

• 1445

The attitude when you went in was that you were just trying to get off work, because back injuries are so hard to prove. That was very frustrating. He finally didn't want to go to see the doctor because he knew they were just going to tell him it was in his head.

Also, this is the public service health care plan. This is the plan that's available for military members and their dependents.

My beef is that the military people don't get what's in this book as well. We do not have access to massage therapy, which would have helped my husband. Chiropractors are difficult to get.

For a hospital stay— he was in the hospital for four days —he was only entitled to a ward room. Had we wanted to upgrade, it would have cost us money out of our own pockets. We don't have any health plan that we can pay into to upgrade as we want with our dependants.

For maternity people, they're entitled to a semi-private ward, but if they want a private ward, again, they have to pay the difference.

OHIP also provides in-home care for people who don't require hospital stay but do need home care. We weren't eligible for that either. Actually, he was going to be sent home for four days until they could do a skin graft, but because we didn't have any in-home care, he had to come to the hospital on base here. We got great care, but it would have been really nice had he been able to go home to recover and have in-home care.

As it was, for approximately six weeks after that, we had to make arrangements for him to come on to the base to get his dressing changed twice a day because we needed the sterile conditions. Again, they don't bring out anybody to do that.

I just have one more thing. There were articles in the newspapers talking about the SCONDVA committee. There was a quote by General de Chastelain. He stated that military people basically should stop complaining. That's because when we joined the military, we knew what we were getting into.

I really disagree with that. Had I known when I joined that there would be very few opportunities for promotion and that your pay would be frozen for five years, I probably would not be in the military right now.

I found that was a very offensive comment. I'm worried that— one general said it —this is possibly an attitude that other people have. Although they might not be saying it, it could still be affecting the way they make decisions. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Private Jason Ochosky.

Private Jason Ochosky (Individual Presentation): Hello, I'm Jason Ochosky. I'm here to address the rise in cost for food for the live-in personnel of CFB Trenton.

CFB Trenton is a test base for the privatization of food costs and the mess hall at CFB Trenton. As a private, I'm not making a lot of money. Basically, my food costs have doubled. They have gone up 100%, if not more. I don't believe that's right.

There are also officer cadets who are probably in the same boat as I am; they don't make a lot of money. Basically, I thought for privates and officer cadets there were a lot of subsidizations for housing and food to help us along. We have to live like this for four years basically before we are promoted to corporals, who make much more money.

This made me have to look at other alternatives for trying to feed myself, such as getting a part-time job maybe. I don't believe that's right. I don't think food services should be privatized. That's about it.

Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby—Ajax, Lib.): Are there any opportunities for you to prepare your own meals where you're living?

Pte Jason Ochosky: They don't really like us to cook in the barracks. It's a fire hazard, and they're not really prepared to build a kitchen for us. All of these issues were brought up at a meeting two weeks ago and also last week over here at the mess.

As for things like hotplates and toaster ovens and stuff, I don't think they really want them in our rooms because of the fire hazard.

• 1450

Mrs. Judi Longfield: If there were such a kitchen facility, do you think a number of privates such as yourself would avail themselves of it to prepare their own meals? It seems you're captive now. You either eat here or you go off-base someplace, but you don't have the opportunity to cook for yourselves.

Pte Jason Ochosky: As of April 1, the cost of our food is going to be going up more than 100%. Right now I pay $208 a month for my rations. It's going to be going up to around $400 to $450 if I eat three squares a day, seven days a week. Even if I don't, and I go home for the weekend or something, I still have to pay for my own food.

There are a lot of privates I've talked to. I'm new in the military. There are about 20 to 25 of us here now, live-in, who basically are going to be going off their rations, trying to prepare their own meals as best they can in their rooms. I think if the military wants to have healthy individuals, they have to offer help to us.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Thank you.

The Chairman: Bob, you had a question.

Mr. Bob Wood: I just need an answer, and I think it's going to be a one-word answer from you, Private. I guess what I hear you saying is that since you joined, they've changed the rules.

Pte Jason Ochosky: Yes, they have.

Mr. Bob Wood: Since you've joined up the rules have been changed.

Pte Jason Ochosky: I've been in the forces for about a year and a half now, and everywhere I've been— CFB Saint-Jean for basic training, CFB Borden for my TQ3 course —there have always been subsidizations. Sometimes food quality hasn't been all too great, but here in Trenton the food quality is excellent.

Basically, yes, the rules have changed, but they've only changed for CFB Trenton. There are no other bases across Canada going to this new privatized system. My friends in Greenwood, my friends in Cold Lake are still going to be paying roughly $208 a month for food, whereas I will be forking out roughly $450 for my meals if I remain at the mess.

Mr. Bob Wood: Thanks.

The Chairman: You mentioned you would have to pay roughly double, going from $208 to roughly $450, or a maximum of $450.

Pte Jason Ochosky: A maximum of $450, sir.

The Chairman: Yes. What percentage of your net pay would $450 represent?

Pte Jason Ochosky: My net pay? $450 would probably be 40%.

The Chairman: Forty percent.

Pte Jason Ochosky: If not more.

I know people who feed families of four for $500 a month, living here on base. You know, they have PMQs. There are a lot of people at the mess, who work there, who don't agree with what's happening to us. I'm not quite sure if they're trying to actually make money on this privatized system, but if they are, they're making it on the backs of young privates, young officer cadets, who don't actually make a salary to afford to have any type of life if we have to eat this way.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Pte Jason Ochosky: Thank you.

The Chairman: Barb Gaboury.

Corporal Barb Gaboury (Individual Presentation): My issue elaborates on Ms. Quade's, with regard to the day care system on this base. As of March 30, there will no longer be licensed home care provided on this base. Prior to this, the family resource centre supplied not only before and after school day care, licensed for subsidy purposes, but also names of individuals who could cover day care for before our call-out times, for summertimes, or any other times the school is not in session.

The before and after program— I have two children in the program right now. The day care on the base itself is only up to the age of senior kindergarten. There is no formal licensed day care in this town for anyone over the age of grade one. With the family resource centre pulling out of home care, people who require subsidy have to apply to two different subsidy offices— the subsidy office here in Quinte West to cover the before and after program, which by the way is the only one in this town, at Breadner school, and the Belleville subsidy office— in order to provide care for any time the school is not open. So every summer, every holiday period, they have to go down to the Belleville office to apply for subsidy. You cannot get two subsidies at the same time.

• 1455

As a single parent, I have to rely on the day care subsidy program. As of the end of this month, all I have is before and after school care. I think that's an affront to any single parent in the military, because we are subjected to early report times, taskings, and the likes of that, and if there is no subsidized care for those who cannot afford day care downtown, we're left in the lurch.

The Chairman: I presume the reason the family resource has pulled out is a financial one.

Cpl Barb Gaboury: I believe it is, but there is no civilian organization that can pick up the slack in this town. We have to go to women who stay home— civilian wives —and they do not understand military tasking, BDFs, or anything of that nature. It is impossible to get overnight care.

What the family resource centre was doing was providing names of military spouses who understood the system and were available for overnight care if necessary. That resource is gone as of the end of this month.

The Chairman: To me, it shouldn't cost all that much money to furnish names. I wonder why that service is being discontinued as of March 31.

Cpl Barb Gaboury: They were also monitoring individuals and helping them get their licence through the city.

The Chairman: I see, okay.

Bob.

Mr. Bob Wood: Are they not even keeping a list of names now of where you can get—

Cpl Barb Gaboury: I've been told to approach the subsidy office in Belleville. The subsidy office in Belleville does not cover the before and after program at Breadner; only the subsidy office in Quinte West does.

Mr. Bob Wood: Why wouldn't they do that? It's not going to cost them any money to write down some names.

Cpl Barb Gaboury: Jurisdiction, sir.

Mr. Bob Wood: If you're posted, what happens to your children?

Cpl Barb Gaboury: My children have to go with me, or I have to provide some sort of care arrangement.

Mr. Bob Wood: We're finding out that this is a major problem at this base.

Cpl Barb Gaboury: Yes, it is. With the resource centre, what they were doing was providing both home care that was licensed and before and after care. So the moment school ended, you were given a name or a number of names that you could screen for yourself, who were licensed, who could provide subsidized care for the summer months.

Now there is no such resource. The home child care program is not going to be covered by the family resource centre any more.

Mr. Bob Wood: Thanks a lot.

Cpl Barb Gaboury: Thank you.

The Chairman: I have one last question.

Oh, Judi.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Who funds the resource centre?

Cpl Barb Gaboury: I think the resource centre is one of the quality of life organizations.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Is there not a board of directors? Is there not a group of military personnel or others who form that board?

Cpl Barb Gaboury: I'm not quite sure of the board.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: I'm getting some nods.

Colonel M.J. Dumais (Individual Presentation): The family resource centre is funded from NDHQ, from the centre.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Okay.

Col M.J. Dumais: All family resource centres are. The decision was made to control that from the centre to ensure identical service levels across the Canadian Forces, because there's a wide disparity in service from one base to another.

What they've done is come out with an operational plan—

Mrs. Judi Longfield: NDHQ?

Col M.J. Dumais: Yes— which covers what are considered to be essential services. There are five core services.

In the case of home day care, the service was provided out in the community. The family resource centre would coordinate the service and would retain a small portion of the daily fee to help pay the cost of administering the service. Because that's not a core function any more, it is not funded by NDHQ. So my understanding is they will continue to collect names and coordinate— at least provide the names. But it's not going to be licensed home care through the family resource centre the way it was before.

• 1500

So those people who are giving the service are still there and are still willing to provide it in most cases; however, it's not coordinated through the family resource centre.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: When did they drop funding for this?

Col M. J. Dumais: The change is just happening as of this year. It's just a reallocation of funding for other priorities.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: We've been travelling a great deal and have visited many family resource centres and talked about many issues that apply to day care, and this has not been one that we have heard before. I'm wondering why suddenly it seems to be something that's been cut from this particular base.

Col M. J. Dumais: It has to do with the operational plan that was submitted by NDHQ to cover all family resource centres.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Is there a mechanism where members or potential users can talk to NDHQ? Are they consulted on what services should be core? Who's making the decision? Certainly I would think that having one's children looked after would a be pretty high priority for most members of the forces.

Col M. J. Dumais: There is a board, as you mention, that coordinates the effort of this family resource centre—

Mrs. Judi Longfield: A local board?

Col M. J. Dumais: Yes, and it has representatives from all concerned areas.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: To your knowledge, has this local board made representation to NDHQ to have funding restored?

Col M. J. Dumais: It's not that there was a significant amount of funding allocated to that function to begin with. It was simply not identified as being a core function per se within the mandate of the family resource centre.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Thank you.

The Chairman: Colonel, would you stay at the microphone, please, for a minute. I believe Mr. Benoit has a question for you. Could we also ask you to identify yourself, just for the record.

Col M.J. Dumais: Sure. I'm Colonel Marc Dumais, Wing Commander, 8 Wing.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Colonel, I have some follow-up questions on this. You say the core functions are determined from headquarters, but a local committee has input into what services they feel should be available here on the base?

Col M.J. Dumais: No. The funding from the centre is predicated on following through on the core functions and the core services that are supposed to be mandated by the family resource centres.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Okay. The core services then are supposed to be across the country. That's what you were saying at first, that headquarters' mandate is to supply equal access across the forces?

Col M.J. Dumais: Not equal access, but equal availability of the same services. There is the provision for additional funding to be provided from, for example, the air force or the army or the navy, for the air force family resource centres, or the army's or the navy's, for additional services, if they wish to provide those.

Mr. Leon Benoit: So the real issue here, no matter what the bureaucracy is or what the system is, is that single parents in the forces who have children of an age where they need care will get that care while they're at work. That's the issue. I think in most other places we heard that this is available; yet we're hearing here today that it's not available. I'm wondering what happened to the access right across the forces.

Col M.J. Dumais: It's available here as well, but it's not a service that's coordinated through the family resource centre any more. And that's not just a Trenton issue; it's going to be forces-wide.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I think what we heard—

Cpl Barb Gaboury: The issue is not that the sitters are unavailable; it's that the subsidy is no longer available, because Quinte West only subsidizes the base for the before and after and the family resource centre, whereas Belleville subsidizes the rest of it, and we cannot get subsidy from two different offices. The only place in this area that is subsidized by Quinte West is the family resource centre. So by pulling out of the family resource centre for subsidized home care, you're cutting off the availability to single parents who require subsidized care.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Okay. I understand now.

Col M.J. Dumais: But it's my understanding that the home care program was not a subsidized program.

Cpl Barb Gaboury: It was a subsidized program for those who qualified for subsidy—

Col M.J. Dumais: I see. Okay.

Mr. Leon Benoit: That qualification was based on salary?

• 1505

Cpl Barb Gaboury: It was based on finances, sir— not only salary, but expenses as well.

Mr. Leon Benoit: It just seems to me that we have a big push on now to get women into the military. It seems to me that if proper day care isn't available, it certainly isn't going to encourage women to come into the forces.

Cpl Barb Gaboury: No, sir.

Mr. Leon Benoit: It seems as if there is a counter-force in there.

Cpl Barb Gaboury: What seems to be happening, sir, is that single parents are being singled out.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I would think that most often the single parents would be women— not always, but in the majority of cases certainly.

Okay. Thank you.

MCpl Janice Quade: Can I add to that?

The core services are for every base. So whether you're in Ottawa, Cold Lake, Edmonton, or Trenton, those same core services will be in place, which is great, although instead of looking at each individual base and taking the best of each base and what is needed for that base—

This base is open 24 hours a day. Edmonton may not be. I'm not sure of their situation, but being in a bigger city they would have more choices there. Here we don't have a choice.

We have one vehicle. There are only two other centres in Trenton. One is a day care, yes, which is not appropriate for my child with special needs. The other is a nursery school program that he cannot take part in all day. It's only a half-day program. So by taking away services that are needed for this specific area, even though they may not be termed a core service, it really does a disservice to the families.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Sergeant Ivan Harvey.

Sergeant Ivan Harvey (Individual Presentation): Good day, ladies and gentlemen.

I'd like to just bring up an extra point on what the privates over there were saying about Trenton being the experimental base for the rationed food service. Apparently, from what I heard at the meeting last week from Captain Pitcher, who is the foods officer on the base, that experimental base was ordered by the deputy minister.

It came up that within 15 days worked, basically— not before —we were told that our rations were going to be doubled. So it's exactly the same thing as if I would come to you and your neighbour and say that within 15 days the rations, or your groceries, are going to be going up by 100%. What would you guys think of doing?

You would probably move out of there and go somewhere else, where everybody is paying the same, which is my point. Why am I paying double here when everybody else around the forces is paying much less? A guy is doing the same job, in the same environment, and he has the same salary and is paying less than me. That's just one point.

The second point is that there are some people on restricted postings in TD. These people are going to be paying less than I am. Why? I'm doing the same job.

On my other question, I've been 18-plus years in the forces. In those 18 years I've seen a couple of companies like that, plus a lot of surveys that have been written on these issues. Since then I haven't seen much done. Actually, the quality of life in the forces in the 18 years I have been in has been going down a lot.

So I would like to know what you people are going to be doing differently from the other people. If it's not going to go in another file 13, or in the garbage if you want to say it— since we're probably going to have other political people in Ottawa voted in another day, if that's going to be put in the garbage again after awhile, or if it's going to be the case that you people are going to be doing something and making some changes, when are those changes going to be made?

• 1510

The Chairman: Sergeant, Mr. Benoit had a question for you, but to answer the second part of your question, I think what you have before you right now is a different kind of committee. We were not sent here by NDHQ. We don't answer to the minister or to the CDS; we answer to the House of Commons.

As you can see before you, there are MPs from all sides of the House of Commons here. We have some from the Progressive Conservatives, some from the Bloc, some Reformers, and some from the Liberals.

I think everybody is anxious that we bring out this report. As you know, we were asked to do this by the minister. He has told us on numerous occasions that he is waiting for our report to implement some of the changes that we will be recommending.

I can assure you also that we wouldn't be doing this if we were to know that, in the end, the report would just be taken and put in, as you say, file 13. I think there's just too much work that has been put in this so far not to use it.

I don't know if I expressed what people around the table are feeling right now, but I think if anybody else wants to add to this, I will let them. I will first go to Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I do have a couple of questions for you, but I would like to say that I think that, in the end, what the government does with what this committee presents to them is up to the government. There's no doubt about it. It's up to the Minister of National Defence in particular.

I do think that on issues like this, the government would be ignoring it at its peril far more than for example a committee that is coming up with a report on the change in structure in the forces or something like that. This is such a personal issue. There are a lot of real people involved, and we can express that as an opposition member of Parliament. I can be pushing the government on this because of that.

So I do think that attention will be paid to this and that some positive results will come from it. I'm certainly not going to say that I'm going to stake my— of course, I'd like to lose my reputation —future in what the government does. Certainly not. I'm an opposition member of Parliament, but I do feel somewhat optimistic about this.

My question has to do with private food services and your statements on that. I wonder if the problem is the private food services itself. Possibly the private outfit that's here running food services can do so in a more efficient and less costly way than the way it was being run before. I don't know, but that certainly is possible.

I think the issue you're talking about is that the cost to you has increased. In fact, it's about double. Is that right?

Sgt Ivan Harvey: Yes.

Mr. Leon Benoit: So it doubled.

Sgt Ivan Harvey: That's what it is. It's basically double, depending on whether or not you buy a card with which you'll get a discount. You get actually the tax discount plus another 5% discount if you buy the card. But if you don't buy the card, if you go for every meal, you're going to be paying a little over $400.

What I'm saying in there is: why should I be here in Trenton paying more when another guy who is living in Ottawa or even Kingston, which is just down the road here, is still paying $200? As the privates were saying over there, I'm not allowed to make my own meals in my room or in the barracks where I live.

Mr. Leon Benoit: That's kind of what I'm getting at. Maybe it isn't so much that it's a private company providing the service; it's the way it's handled. You don't really have much choice. You don't really have a lot of choice in how you're going to get your food because of the restrictions you're talking about. And there hasn't been any corresponding pay increase here to help you with the extra cost.

Sgt Ivan Harvey: Exactly.

Mr. Leon Benoit: There hasn't been anything to compensate for the difference between this base and all other bases. So maybe those are the issues more than the fact that a private outfit is—

• 1515

Sgt Ivan Harvey: Since it's just experimental, why are we paying more? Why are we not just subsidized until they decide that all the bases are going to be doing the same, and from there on we'll pay? At least we'll have time to get used to it, to get our minds set for that.

They started to make our minds set, but they didn't put a price on anything at all. Fifteen days before, they started to say price, and prices were saying double. Even as of Tuesday of last week they didn't know the exact price because the contract was not signed.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I understand your concern now and I think it's valid and is something that should be dealt with.

Sgt Ivan Harvey: The private over there was talking about privates, and we're talking about officer cadets, but you also have to think about the other ranks— corporal, master corporal, sergeant and above, and some of the officers who have problems related to the military lifestyle. A lot of us are divorced but have kids around, and we still have to pay double and things like this.

We make the choice to go live in the barracks to give ourselves a chance to prepare for a second life. Lots of them have debts all over the place, up to their ears. We don't have to count on a pay raise because so far that's just been a joke. I heard rumours of 3%, but that would be lucky. That's going to give me an extra $15 every 15 days. That doesn't go with the extra $200 I'll have to pay each month for living.

Mr. Leon Benoit: That's right, the pay increase announced on Friday was 3.5% for the lower ranks.

Sgt Ivan Harvey: Thank you.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chairman: Don't go away. I think Mr. Wood has a question.

Mr. Bob Wood: Sergeant, you said there was an experimental food service.

Sgt Ivan Harvey: Yes, that's what it is. It's experimental right now, but experimental for how long?

Mr. Bob Wood: Yes, that's what I want to know.

Sgt Ivan Harvey: We don't know. They will try for six months with the company they have now. If it works, it works, but if it doesn't work they will go to the highest bidder. From what I heard the highest bidder was $6 million over. So it's not going to be double; it's probably going to triple now.

Mr. Bob Wood: So there's no time limit.

Sgt Ivan Harvey: Basically, we're going to be the guinea pigs for all the bases around.

Mr. Bob Wood: So there's no time limit on this. This can be experimental for six months, a year, or whatever.

Sgt. Ivan Harvey: Exactly. It's quality of life we're talking about here. If I had known that 18 years ago I wouldn't have signed.

Mr. Bob Wood: Thank you.

The Chairman: Sir, could you come back to the microphone please?

[Translation]

Mr. Lebel, you have a question?

Mr. Ghislain Lebel (Chambly, BQ): Yes. Did you say this was being done on an experimental basis?

Sgt Ivan Harvey: Yes.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: What results are anticipated at this time from the experiment? It used to cost you two hundred dollars; now it's going to cost you four hundred dollars. Obviously the experiment won't be disadvantageous for the food service supplier, the outfit that sells the meals. But what does the government hope to learn from the experiment?

Sgt Ivan Harvey: What it hopes—

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Perhaps prices will triple next time.

Sgt Ivan Harvey: No.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: So what does the government expect will happen?

Sgt Ivan Harvey: It's simply trying to privatize food services, meal services, on military bases.

Currently, in a number of places in Canada, they're operating off subsidies. It's entirely military with a few civilians. The food is normally supplied out of the Forces budget.

What they want to do now is privatize food services in many places in the hope of saving money. They wouldn't need to subsidize these services anymore. That's essentially what they're trying to do. Right now that's what they're trying in Trenton.

My opinion is that while they're carrying out their experiments, I have to pay more for the same service. Why should I pay more because they decided to try an experiment?

Maybe in the end it'll prove to be a good thing, but if it doesn't I'll still have paid more for something that won't benefit me in any way.

• 1520

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: You say you've been in the service for 18 years. In the past, did people who didn't want to participate in the meal plan have access to facilities where they could cook for themselves? I know that at Borden—

Sgt Ivan Harvey: No, there were no facilities.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: There weren't any here?

Sgt Ivan Harvey: No.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Thank you.

The Chairman: Ms. Longfield and then Mr. Price.

[English]

Mrs. Judi Longfield: When we got talking about what a success the food services were here, I guess I thought it was going to cost the military less, but at no time did I assume in the request for proposals that it would cost the military personnel twice—

Sgt Ivan Harvey: I guess you've been misled.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Yes. Perhaps they were going to recoup it with what they were already doing and charge you more and not privatize it. I don't seem to understand. I'm certainly going to ask more questions.

You wanted to add a couple of things.

Pte Jason Ochosky: The privatized company that's dealing with this did say they would give us a tax break of 15%, plus an additional 5% off all of our food costs. My figures don't really include that. My figures are after—

Mrs. Judi Longfield: That's the bottom line for you, $450 as opposed to—

Pte Jason Ochosky: Even with the 20% discount they're offering the live-in personnel, I still have to pay $400 to $450. So you can imagine that if they weren't offering us this incentive, it would be much more money for the live-in personnel.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Do you just buy a meal card and then eat what you wish, or do you punch it through?

Pte Jason Ochosky: Every item you want to consume is costed, and that would come out of a card that you would purchase. It's going to cost me $450 to eat this month. So I would take $450 and go to the BOR, give it to them, and they would give me a card. It would be a debit system.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: So if you eat more than that, you'd either have to go some place else or buy an additional card.

Pte Jason Ochosky: If I'm a big eater I could eat much more than that. If I'm a small eater I could eat much less, but according to my statistics and what I have been eating for the past three months I've been in Trenton, it would cost me $450, and I'm not here on weekends.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: That's five days a week.

Pte Jason Ochosky: Yes, five days a week. I go home on weekends. I pay for my food at home as well.

Sgt Ivan Harvey: One thing you have to think about is that when we talk about $450, it is what you used to eat. Right now, for what they're going for— what is actually in the tray has been diminished a lot. So there's less on your tray that you're going to be eating. That's why people are saying they want to keep on doing the same lifestyle. A lot of people are training down at the gym, and when you train you eat more. If you want to train, you want to be fit. In the forces, if you eat more it's going to cost you more. People have a tendency to say if it costs me more I'm not going to pay for it, I'm not going to eat that much, so I'm not going to train. So he's not going to be fit. We're talking about health here.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you, Judi.

David Price.

Mr. David Price (Compton—Stanstead, PC): I find this whole thing rather ridiculous. To follow up on Judi's question, I think it should be in the contract that the cost would remain the same. I went through the situation with the university, where they privatized the food service. It was in the contract that they couldn't change the price the students were paying. It had to remain the same. I've seen it happen over the past 12 years now, and they've changed contractors three times. Every four years it went out for tender and they changed contractors.

Here you have an in-house system. It's going to be interesting to see what happens three years from now when you go out to tender again. They're going to find they're not making money. Maybe they're going to be if they're able to raise the price any time they want, but there is a limit.

• 1525

I think we ought to look very seriously at the contract itself and see if there is a clause in there. If there isn't, any future ones they're looking at should definitely be set up. This is ridiculous. Here the government is saving money, and that's just been passed on directly to the end-user.

Sgt Ivan Harvey: From what I heard, actually it's over six months, not over three years. So basically if the in-house people here don't work it out within six months, now it's the second bidder that actually takes it over. The second bidder was $6 million more.

If the first one doesn't make it while we're paying, if the second bidder goes in—

Mr. David Price: Well, obviously if they can charge more, they won't have any trouble making it. I'm not worried about them making it. I'm sure we'll see them here for quite a while.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Colonel, I believe you had—

Col M.J. Dumais: Yes. If you wouldn't mind, there's a lot of discussion about this ASD initiative, so I thought I'd better clarify some of the points here.

It is correct that the cost for live-in members in fact has essentially doubled as of April 1.

The ASD process for Wing foods was something that was trialled by NDHQ. They wanted one air force, one army and one navy base to go through with this. I volunteered 8 Wing, Trenton. This was a two-year process.

The end result is not privatization per se, in the sense that the in-house bid won the contract. The end result is roughly $1 million a year in savings for 8 Wing, Trenton, which is quite significant. If we had not had an in-house bid on this ASD initiative, the next contractor who submitted a bid would have cost about $6 million more. So it would have cost significantly more to everyone.

It's a radical departure from the way we have provided food services on the wing. It's more of a user-pay system than it was before, but ultimately it does save money for the wing and the air force.

I agree it's unfair that there should be different costs for different people at different wings and bases across the country. I totally agree with that. To be honest, I was surprised at the increase to the users that resulted from the contract.

I guess they only other point I would like to make is that this is similar to other areas that are unequal across the wings and bases. For example, there is the cost of married quarters that are not consistent. So this is another area.

I'm convinced, however, that this was the right direction to go for the wing, considering the budgetary reductions we're facing over the last few years, and especially this year, a $6 million reduction.

The bottom line is that the cost of food for live-in members is not subsidized any more. That means an increase in costs to the individual. That's the bottom line.

The Chairman: Colonel, I think there are a couple more questions for you.

M. Benoit, et ensuite M. Lebel.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Colonel, if there's a saving of $1 million due to the ASD contracting that process, then why would people be paying more? It seems to me they should be paying less.

Col M.J. Dumais: The people who are living in are basically customers now.

Mr. Leon Benoit: But is the saving because the service is actually provided at a lower cost, or is the saving because the members are paying more?

Col M.J. Dumais: The saving is that the crown is no longer subsidizing the cost of meals.

Mr. Leon Benoit: So is the service actually being provided for less money now than it cost before?

Col M.J. Dumais: I would say we're providing a better service at less cost at the wing level. But people are going to have to pay for what they get.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Then there are two issues here. First, you're saying that the service is clearly being provided for less cost by the people who are providing. Basically it's still in-house, but they won the contract.

This could just as easily be done on all other bases as well, without changing who is providing the service or how it's being provided.

The second issue is that members of the forces are having to pay directly now for the cost.

Col M.J. Dumais: That's right.

Mr. Leon Benoit: So there are two separate issues here.

That could just as easily have happened if the service had been provided as it was before, only now members are going to have to pay for their food and for the service.

• 1530

Col M.J. Dumais: Well, I suppose, yes. As I say, we've changed the way we're doing business now. It's not subsidized the way it was before. So we are more clearly identifying the costs in providing the food for the various functions.

It's not strictly the outlook you saw there today. In-flight feeding and other areas are also provided by that service. But that is one area that obviously is not—

The desired outcome of this process is that they are now treating it like a business, and they are not going to make a profit; I have confirmed that. The intent is not to make a profit here. All they want to do is break even, because if they cannot meet their costs, then it will automatically go to a renewed bid, or it will go to the next bidder. We don't want either one of those options. So we've made the best of a tough situation right now.

There's no question that from a wing perspective, we're very pleased that the in-house bid won the contract. But in today's climate, where we have to account for all dollars and there's a reduced budget at wing level, I don't have any choice. That's my position.

Mr. Leon Benoit: With the way it was set up?

Col M.J. Dumais: No, with charging people for what they eat.

Mr. Leon Benoit: But would that be the case if the way the service was provided hadn't changed?

Col M.J. Dumais: Well, we could have stayed under the previous system, which cost us $1 million a year more.

Mr. Leon Benoit: But then the meals that were being provided under that old system were being subsidized?

Col M.J. Dumais: Essentially, yes.

Mr. Leon Benoit: And under this new system there's no allowance for that subsidy to remain in place? Is that—

Col M.J. Dumais: Well, that's right, because it's basically gone out for contract, and our in-house team won the contract. So it's strictly a pure business transaction now. There is no government subsidization for the provision of live-in food.

Well, there are exceptions to that, of course, for people who are on courses and on government business, but without getting into detail, there's a very strict menu they have to follow. In other words, the crown will not subsidize someone having a beer with their meal. So there are strict limitations as to what they can and cannot eat and how much when they're on government business. But when individuals are on their own time and eating there, it's the same as going to downtown Trenton to eat: you get what you pay for.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

Sgt Ivan Harvey: I would just like to add one thing to that. It seems that the way we're going, it's towards more and more business. When I joined the military 18 and a half years ago, I didn't join a business. Now we're changing things. That was not really part of my contract, or the way I read it at the time.

Sure, I'm going to do my contract the way it is right now, but we're talking about a different way of doing business, privatizing everything like this. It seems that privatization of a lot of stuff doesn't give the people in the military any advantage at all. We're actually getting all the dirty jobs, the dirty part of it, and it is just getting worse and worse.

We're trying to change the military into a business; that's the problem.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Mr. Lebel.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Colonel Dumais, you spoke of subsidized meals, but having traveled a bit on military bases, I'm wondering if it isn't the soldiers who are subsidizing the Forces now.

I'll take the example of this young soldier who has been here for a year and a half and who's barely earning what the other provinces pay as minimum wage. The argument is that his meals are subsidized over and about his salary. I wonder if the day is coming when soldiers will provide their own ammunition and rifle. We're heading in that direction.

I don't mean to criticize you—

Col. M.J. Dumais: You're absolutely right.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: I really believe that we're squeezing the lemon a little too hard. I realize that you're obeying orders from the command center in Ottawa. However, between you and me, Colonel Dumais, do you find it reasonable to tell people who have made a vocation of their work that after 15, 18 or 20 years of good and loyal service for which they weren't paid particularly well, we've decided that even so they were paid too much? And that from now on, they will have to pay for their own meals at cost? Don't you think that that amounts to a change in the pay scale itself? In the end, it's their salary that's affected.

• 1535

I would like your opinion on that.

Col. M.J. Dumais: I couldn't agree more.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: We should think of making recommendations about this point?

Col. M.J. Dumais: Absolutely.

From my point of view, these are very difficult decisions that we're forced to make because of the budget cuts that the Canadian Forces have undergone over the past four to eight years. They're very difficult choices to make.

Our goal is to maintain our operational capacity so that we can carry out our mandate.

As I explained this morning, our mandate here at Trenton has a global scope. It's a mandate that requires a great deal from our people. Unfortunately, from our point of view, the funds aren't adequate to ensure that we can meet all our personnel's needs.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: I will go further than that, Colonel. Would you agree that we've reached the point of trying to get blood from a stone?

Col. M.J. Dumais: It isn't only stones that are bleeding these days.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Well put. Thank you.

[English]

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit, you can ask a very short question.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Actually, Colonel, I just have a bit of a follow-up on this. I'm all for the issue of efficiency and having the services provided in the most efficient way, especially for services that won't have to move with the forces personnel as they go on overseas postings, for example. These efficiencies should be put in place. If it's going to cost taxpayers less, that's good. In this case it was the in-house group that won the bid. Saving $1 million was good.

But I don't think that has anything at all to do with having members of the forces paying for their food. I don't know how common that is around the world. Is it common for personnel in the United States forces to buy their food on the base? Is that done in Britain and other countries?

I'm just thinking about what I'd heard in the forces before. Certain things came with the job, and I think one was the food. From a health point of view, and as was pointed out before, it is important to note that there is good food and enough of a quantity to keep people who are using such energy— as these people are —properly supplied.

With reference to the equipment, it now seems that even some of the basic equipment— some combat equipment —is not being provided. So some of the basic things you would expect to be there for members of the military are no longer there.

That's a completely separate issue from providing an efficient service. I'd just like your comments on that, please.

Col M.J. Dumais: I can't speak for the British and Americans, but in essence I agree with what you're saying. Obviously we would like to be in a position— certainly I would —where I could subsidize the expenses of our military members as much as possible.

You run into equitability issues, though, in terms of what is fair and who gets what. For example, on the question of subsidizing food, yes, we have subsidized the food of live-in members up until now. But at this stage of the game, would it be appropriate and fair for me to take a part of my dramatically reducing budget to subsidize live-in members when people living in PMQs and some of our families living in the community are not being subsidized by 8 Wing budgets? I don't see that it is my place to make those kinds of decisions, and I don't think it's within my authority to allocate the Queen's money to subsidize any particular group.

Now, in the past this was basically the way we did business, and it was within the regulations. What we're saying is that with alternate service delivery those procedures are being changed.

The fact that 8 Wing is first in the starting block was simply my intent not to live with the result of somebody else's initiative. There are other wings and bases that have decided not to provide an in-house team for the food bid. Had that happened in Trenton— and this goes to the credit of the in-house team who stuck with it through a long and hard two years, as you heard this morning —had they folded their tent and decided not to bid, we would be paying $6 million more for this same service right now.

• 1540

The bottom line is we're going in that direction in certain areas, and I think we have to. That doesn't prevent the government and Treasury Board from bestowing additional subsidies, as we talked about in a general sense, to all members of the Canadian Forces. But it's very difficult for me to target any particular group just because we used to do it that way.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I understand now. You've filled in the rest of the picture, which I was missing this afternoon. So thank you for that.

Col M.J. Dumais: Thank you.

The Chairman: David, a small question.

Mr. David Price: You said it would have been $6 million more had the next bidder won. So therefore if in-house hadn't bid you would have come out with $5 million to add to your budget.

Col M.J. Dumais: Over five years. Close to $1 million a year.

Mr. David Price: So $1 million a year. Therefore nil as far as the $1 million you were looking for budget-wise. What happens in that case? Would you have stayed with the service as is?

Col M.J. Dumais: We had no choice. It was a bid.

Mr. David Price: Okay. You were tied to the lowest conforming bidder.

Col M.J. Dumais: Absolutely. It wasn't a decision that was made at 8 Wing. The bidding process was taken over and hijacked by headquarters with PWGSC. It was a big issue. A lot of people are looking at ASD in general, and so there was a lot of control at higher levels on this whole process.

We assisted in preparing the request for proposal, but there were a lot of parameters that were injected in there to make it certainly fair and appear to be fair under scrutiny. There was a lot of concern that there would not be a level playing field and that the in-house bid would have undue preference.

Mr. David Price: You said this morning that you had consultants who did help you out on this whole process. Were the consultants from headquarters or a private firm?

Col M.J. Dumais: A private firm.

We did have some help from our headquarters as well, but we did have some consultants from the private sector.

Mr. David Price: Would you happen to know if in the Goose Bay situation they had consultants there?

Col M.J. Dumais: I wouldn't want to answer that one.

Mr. David Price: Okay. Thank you.

Pte Jason Ochosky: I would like to say a few things. There were three other bases slated to undertake this and the other two bailed out. We found this out at the meeting two weeks ago and as well last week.

I believe there is a price list of food items and there still is a subsidy. The people who are living in are not being subsidized any more. The people who are on course, the people who are on TD, are paying up to 50% less than we are. There's a list right there.

I've been a student for a number of years. I know exactly how much it costs to eat. Yes, I'm an older private, but I believe I have a good view of the way the world is and the cost of things. $450, $400, even $300 for a single person to eat is ludicrous. Why should other military members be subsidized? Why should the crown? I do believe it is the crown that is subsidized now on this list.

So it's just been changing things around. We're not subsidized; now the crown is subsidized up to 50%, if you take a look at the lists. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Mr. Jason Porteous.

Mr. Jason Porteous (Individual Presentation): I have two points, one of which has been brought up already.

In the public service health care plan I have the highest level of coverage we're allowed to get. I think it's level 3. I think we pay $4 a month.

My wife went into the hospital to have our child a couple of months ago. The plan doesn't cover a private room in Belleville, so we paid $25 for each night she stayed in a private room. It's kind of sad that I don't have the option to pay the monthly fee to get the type of coverage that will cover me to give my wife a private room in the hospital. That's been brought up already.

• 1545

The second point is on employment insurance benefits. Members of the military pay them, as everyone else does, but at the end of their term they can't collect them. I'm wondering if that's been brought up yet.

The Chairman: Yes, if memory serves me correctly, the unemployment insurance has been brought up on a number of occasions in quite a few places, almost every base, so it will be something we will be looking into.

Are there any questions?

Mr. Jason Porteous: Thanks.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Sergeant Rick Blouin.

Sergeant Rick Blouin (Individual Presentation): Hi, how are you doing? I guess the question on UIC I might as well strike out, but I would like to ask about when there's a change of contract, which UIC is part of. We also had a change of contract for medical. I remember when I joined over 20-some years ago, DND was supposed to care for me medically and also feed me— feeding is another story —but now medical has changed. Before you used to be able to go to the hospital. They gave you cough drops if you had a cold or they gave you a little bag and then you went home. Lately we've seen in the ROs, the routine orders, or anything like that, that it's becoming a thing of the past. You have to go downtown now and buy your own stuff, which is fine, but when I joined 20-some years ago self-medication was a big no-no. Now what rules are we playing with? As far as I am concerned, this is a rule that has been changed on my contract. Now where do I have a say in there?

Also, in the same rules, again in the same contract I signed 20 years ago, they gave me five weeks vacation that I could choose whatever to do with. That changed a few years ago when they said you could no longer accumulate leave. Now I have to take my leave. If it is given to me as my choice, should I not have the choice to decide whatever I want to do with it? That has changed in the contract. Again, what say do I have in there? That's my first point.

My second point is in regard to the physical fitness test we have to do. I have a male member who right now is on remedial PD, which means he has to go every day and do his PD, because he failed the test. I don't know if members are aware, but it's a shuttle run. You have to do six runs basically back and forth, because he's a male. At the next step he's going to be on C and P if he doesn't pass the test, and at the next step he's going to be booted out.

I don't want to bring up any sexist points or anything like that, but my point is if he doesn't pass his third test, he's being kicked out. This male member could easily be replaced— and again I don't want to be sexist —by a female, who only has to do three shuttle runs versus six. That's the question. Where does that kick in? Human rights or—

The Chairman: For your information, this was another subject that was brought to our attention, I believe in Cold Lake. In Cold Lake, 20 push-ups—

I can't give you an answer right now, but we will look into it.

Sgt Rick Blouin: Okay.

I would just make the point that as a supervisor I'm trying to have equal rights on the job. If you can do the job, I don't care what gender you are, I don't care what your religion is, I don't care where you come from. There's a job to be done. Do the job. But when it comes down to something like that, this corporal basically had the right. He came up to me and said, “If I don't pass, I could have a female corporal taking my spot next week.” So equal rights for equal opportunities.

• 1550

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

A question, Judi?

Mrs. Judi Longfield: I agree with you 100%. I think the requirements for the job should be the same for male or female. It's a point well made.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Major Sylvain Lepage.

[Translation]

Major Sylvain Lepage (individual presentation): With your permission, I'm going to speak French. There are three points I would like to make. The first deals with the medical services that we receive in the Armed Forces. Ever since I became a member of the forces, medical services have been declining steadily. When you listen to the news, you realize that they're declining everywhere. So I said to myself, we're in the same boat as everyone else. But recently I was speaking with a former colleague who left the Forces and is working for a big company. The employees there are fighting back and they have medical services provided by the company. These big companies do this to keep their employees, to lose less time and so forth. So I'm wondering why the Canadian Forces are trying so hard to do it differently when they should continue to look after their people adequately.

That's my point of view, in any case. We have to wait longer and longer to get an appointment, with both doctors and dentists. The wait is very long. We're often referred to specialists who aren't part of the Forces. So I conclude that our services are dwindling drastically.

Another point I'd like to raise involves members of the military travelling as part of internal operations. There again budgets are diminishing steadily and since we're being forced to travel more and more often, we're more and more often forced to use what's called a service flight. I don't know the word in French for "service flight". Service flights are planes that are going across the country and on which seats are free for members of the military who are part of a given unit.

On other hand, that often forces us to spend several days more away for our families because the plane doesn't always come back at a convenient moment for us. For example, a flight may not return before Friday although the meeting we went to attend concluded on Wednesday. This means we have to spend two days away for nothing. Sometimes it's a weekend we have to spend like that.

I don't know if it would be possible to change this way of proceeding so that we wouldn't be forced to use service flights anymore. There should be another way of travelling. You hear more and more talk about quality of life. We're often away from home. By using these flights, we're away even more because they follow a calendar or timetable fixed in advance.

Lastly, I would like to speak about the Guaranteed Home Sale Program, the GHSP. I moved last year. When they explained to me how the Program worked, they said first that the reason it exists is to reduce the stress that members of the military and their families have to undergo when they move.

I can tell you the Program didn't diminish the stress I had to undergo. On the contrary, it made it worse. We had to fight over and over again about evaluations and to determine whether we were in fact eligible for the Program. It was a huge problem for the administration because, as you know, postings affect everybody at same time. So it's an enormous task.

I would like to know why the basic percentage has been fixed at 10 per cent. The market has to suffer a 10 percent drop before you're eligible. Why was this basic percentage set at 10 per cent instead of 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9 per cent?

Treasury Board has issued a rule that I don't understand very well. In my case, they did three evaluations that differed a great deal; one was 13 per cent, one was 5 per cent and the third was 7 per cent. Under this Treasury Board rule, you have to take the two closest percentages to determine whether you're eligible or not for the program.

Those are the points I wanted to make to the Committee.

The Chairman: Thank you very much. Mr. Lebel, you have a question?

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Major Dumais, you're at liberty to answer the question I'm going to put or not, because it deals with your own business, your private life. I'm asking it because it may be enlightening for the members of this Committee. How much was the loss you suffered on the sale of your property? How much do you estimate it at?

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: I put it at $6,000.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: $6,000?

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: Yes. Of course, this amount may include non-eligible expenditures.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Does this $6,000 represent the difference between the price you paid and the price at which you sold?

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: No, because I bought it . . . You know, the falling market . . . I kept that house for seven years. I lived in Ottawa for seven years. Prices didn't go up at all. I made improvements to the house, like finishing the basement and upgrading the exterior. Over seven years, I was never able to get that money back, which is pretty unbelievable. But that's the way the market is these days. I would have thought that the Forces would have defrayed that loss for me, or at least a part of it.

• 1555

What I have trouble accepting, was that I couldn't even deduct that loss on my income tax return. I found that the loss incurred when a house is sold isn't considered to be a loss of income, because a profit on a house isn't considered a capital gain.

The Chairman: Mr. Price.

Mr. David Price: Major, with regard to the issue of service flights, as you call them, this is a service used for military business and not for personal purposes?

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: Yes, for military business.

Mr. David Price: Right. But suppose you have to go, for example, to North Bay. Could you take your car if it wasn't too far?

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: Yes, everything's—

Mr. David Price: Do the Forces defray your costs?

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: That's right.

Mr. David Price: Fine. Do they give you the choice? Suppose you have to attend a meeting in North Bay. You can wait for the service flight. Do you have a choice in that instance?

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: Yes, sir.

Mr. David Price: Yes. Good.

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: We have the choice, but obviously—

Mr. David Price: But if you have to go to Halifax, for example—

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: Exactly. If you go to Cold Lake or to Winnipeg, where we often have to go on business, because that's our headquarters, we're often stuck there for quite a while.

Mr. David Price: Often?

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: Two or three days.

Mr. David Price: Two or three days, is that about the maximum?

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: Yes, that's right.

Mr. David Price: Right. Thank you.

The Chairman: Major, to answer your question, I think that the 10 per cent threshold was ordered by a decision of Treasury Board.

Are you suggesting to the Committee this afternoon that we ask to have this threshold revised downward? Have I understood correctly?

Maj. Sylvain Lepage: Yes, sir.

The Chairman: Right. We've noted your suggestion. Thank you very much.

We still have four or five other witnesses to hear from. I would like to propose that we take a 10 or 15 minute break before hearing them.

[English]

We have four more witnesses to hear, and we have about an hour to go. I suggest we take a ten- to fifteen-minute break and we can come back. Thank you.

• 1558

• 1614

The Chairman: It seems I forgot a witness. Mr. Gordon Chamberlain, please. You can start.

Corporal Gordon Chamberlain (Individual Presentation): Good afternoon. I have a number of issues I'd like to bring up.

• 1615

You've probably heard quite a bit about our pay. The first issue I want to bring forward is the issue of our irregular pay periods. Have you heard anything about that?

The Chairman: Irregular?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: Irregular. We're paid on the 15th and 30th of every month. That can range because of the way the calendar year works— Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday —and it keeps rotating like that throughout the year. Our co-workers, the civilian DND employees, get paid every second Thursday.

I have some examples of where it affects us. On March 15 our pay period was on a Sunday, and the next one, March 30, was on a Wednesday, and it goes like that throughout the year. In other words, there's no consistency of when our pay is available.

Mr. Bob Wood: I shouldn't interrupt you. I'm just trying to figure it out. You say you get paid on a Sunday. If the 15th is on a Sunday, does your money go in the bank on the 13th?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: It will be available to us on a Friday, but if it comes in on a Monday, we don't get to see it, and it goes throughout the year. I believe there's about three or four or five pay periods where it jumps all over the place.

Mr. Bob Wood: And you also get two or three extra pays, too, right?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: No, it's the other way around; it's the civilian co-workers.

Mr. Bob Wood: That's what I mean.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: The issue is not more, but whatever we're entitled to in the year and divided between equal pay periods seems to be a pretty simple solution. Our civilian co-workers are getting it; in the same management system, somewhere, someone found out it was rocket science and said no, it can't happen.

The other issue is mess dues. Every military member is forced to pay mess dues. I did a rough calculation. Hopefully we're not there, but it's based on 60,000 members: 45,000 junior ranks paying $8 a month times 12 months equals $4.3 million; 7,500 senior NCOs at approximately $15 a month for 12 months, $1.4 million; 7,500 officers $19 a month times 12, another $1.8 million. That totals approximately $7.5 million that armed forces personnel are forced to pay into institutions that are generally not attended.

Recently, a newsletter quoted the membership as saying they supported these institutions. Well, you can come to them, and a vast majority of time the members aren't going to them, the reason being that our unit chooses to go to institutions where we can go all ranks and there is no issue. Here, it's controlled as to how many times a year we can have all-ranks activities. I believe it's two, sir, every quarter, or four. The issue is being forced to pay into institutions that the majority of us do not attend.

I have to apologize for being out of uniform. This uniform no longer exists, except I can't get the replacement. So in typical military fashion, they bring something in, establish that it's now no longer in effect, but I can't go to the other one because it's not available. You know, we look at these things and we ask, did they think about the next stage when they made the first decision? You know, we want you to change all your clothing, but we're not going to think about the availability of the next stage. I think I've been waiting a month now for a pair of pants. Heaven help us if we have to do anything major if we can't supply pants.

The next one is the issue of a question. I believe Parliament voted on the armed forces participating in the Gulf War action, however that was going to turn out. I'm wondering what your awareness was of the dangers to our troops from spent uranium. Would you know anything about that?

• 1620

Mr. David Price: We didn't know.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: Okay.

The Chairman: Spent uranium from where?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: Spent uranium is being used in armour plating for tanks and it's also being used for armour-piercing shells.

You're not going to hear too much of this from the air force. They're not involved in the ground dangers. It's going to be mainly an army issue.

Some scientists decided this was a good way to get rid of the spent uranium in the plutonium enrichment program. The outer casing for tanks is spent uranium. Also, the tips of armour-piercing shells are spent uranium. So when the two happen to meet, you get a battlefield littered with radioactive material.

The Americans, I believe in the last six months, are reluctantly coming forward and saying they failed through the whole system of notifying contractors who were working on these tanks sanding them. They weren't aware they were sanding radioactive material.

The soldiers in the field posing next to taken-out battle tanks are standing in radioactive material. They were not aware.

The issue being brought forward is the relationship between that and second-generation birth defects, which are much more prevalent in the American armed forces, because of their numbers and because of the amount of land combat troops they had.

But you show me that as our elected representatives, you voted on the decision for us to engage in an action, maybe not being aware of what we were getting into.

The Chairman: We make decisions on the information we have at hand. I've just asked the researchers to find out more about what you have just brought forward.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: Okay. The Toronto Star has been dealing with this issue over the past several months.

The other question I have is in reference to your mandate, the timeframe. It's just educational. How long is your mandate established for now?

The Chairman: We hope we will be presenting our report to the House of Commons as early as possible in the fall sitting. We should be finishing our trips around May or the beginning of June, and then the House stops sitting for the summer. The researchers are going to be putting together a preliminary report, and probably in late August or early September, the committee will be getting together to get the final report out to be presented as soon as the House begins sitting.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: And this will be a public document?

The Chairman: Oh, yes. It will be on the Internet.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: I'd just like to give you an indication of what some of us have to go through.

I'm being notified that I'm potentially being posted this year, yet my family is going to be left behind. That's potentially looking at a three-year posting.

The Chairman: Where are you being posted?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: So far they say Petawawa. That's going to be a hard decision.

The Chairman: Why can't you bring your family?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: She's service.

The Chairman: Oh, I see.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: There is limited or no potential for her moving. She being air force, they like to keep her where she is. She's been qualified on their particular aircraft. That is the reality of service life.

• 1625

I understand their objectives. They have their operational requirements. Sometimes you can understand why they'll— “Well, we'll look at it. Oh, it must be another force reduction program”. If there's going to be any attempt to accommodate the member— or just say “Lump it or love it; we'll cross that bridge when we get to it”. That is just an indication of it.

Three years is basically a sentence for a family with adolescent kids. I don't think I'm going to let them do that.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Would you just hang on a minute here. Mr. Benoit has a question.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you for your presentation.

I have three questions in two different areas. First, I've a question for you on the whole issue of spent uranium in tanks. Where did you hear about that? How do you know that's a fact?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: The Toronto Star quoted I'm not sure which department in the United States— the Department of Defense?

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes, that's right.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: It quoted their neglect at improperly informing the contractors as well as their ground troops because of the investigation that's going on with Gulf War syndrome.

Mr. Leon Benoit: And are Canadians using the same equipment? Is that the point?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: The ground troops would be present in the same area. I'm not current on what armaments and what armour we're using. It's hard to separate the two who are cooperating together.

Mr. Leon Benoit: The second question is more a comment on uniforms. I believe it was Doug Young who was minister when there was a $500 million program put in place to replace uniforms and personal equipment. It was an emergency program. It really hasn't worked. It's been really slow.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: I would like to comment on that one. I'm not going to be getting a suit coat or a dress coat with my summer dress. I'll be obliged to wear my winter-weight pants as part of my summer uniform. They'll take away our much better looking summer dress. We just scratch our heads and say, oh well, some committee somewhere in the background made a decision.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes, it sounds like it.

My next question is on the three-year posting and your family being left behind. Do you see an alternative? Do you see some solution where you and your wife could be posted to a place that would allow your family to stay together?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: I look at it this way. I'm at the end of my career. I've done six years in the infantry. I've done a double UN tour. That was in previous trades. Their thinking might be that now I'm in a new one, that we'll erase the slate and we'll start over again. I don't think I'm going to let them do that.

My question to myself is under what guidelines our career managers operate. It seems to be a personal call on how they manage our careers. We call them career manglers.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes, we've heard a lot of complaints about career managers. We've also talked to career managers and you hear a different point of view.

They do operate under guidelines. Perhaps some of the guidelines just don't make any sense. And in some other cases perhaps it's just hard to see—

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: I don't think the vast majority of the members are aware of what guidelines there are, so information is power.

Mr. Leon Benoit: That's a good point. Why on earth shouldn't the people whose careers are the issue here know what the rules are that are governing them and have that readily available, not just somewhere where you can get it if you go through a lot of effort? That should be readily available.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: I'm willing to do UN tours. The issue is three years. That's particularly difficult on a family.

Mr. Leon Benoit: And that's what I want to pursue again.

You didn't answer my question. You don't see a real alternative in terms of your being posted someplace where you and your wife could be posted. Is the military going to suffer if you are not posted somewhere else in this posting?

• 1630

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: The combat positions are normally assigned to new people coming into the trade; they don't allocate the field duties at the end of their careers. They're looked down on by most people because they're rough.

Mr. Leon Benoit: You would expect, then, at this time in your career that you normally wouldn't get field postings.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: Normally.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Why do you think it's being done? Why are you being posted away from your family in a military that says it wants to be family friendly?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: Maybe they just haven't thought about it enough. Their process selection, we sometimes jokingly say, is done with a dartboard or a spinning device. If you ask them to analyse the grounds on which a decision was made, it sometimes comes out pretty weak. It's “Just because.”

Mr. Leon Benoit: It's a pretty serious charge, if you want to call it that. This is an extremely serious thing. Tearing a family apart for three years is extremely serious. There's no other way you can look at it. Do you honestly believe the people who are making those decisions— your career manager —really doesn't care?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: To put it bluntly, yes. If I were in their position, it wouldn't be number one on my list. I have to fill a job. Who's available? How I got to the top of that list—

Mr. Leon Benoit: Doesn't your commanding officer go to bat for you with the career manager?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: I was informed of the posting verbally, from my superior going to visit my career manager, because there have been so many changes lately. I think you've heard about the funding allocation for postings, so the individual's ability to juggle people has been changed three times. As of their last meeting— I believe it was a month ago —that was the last I heard.

Mr. Leon Benoit: How much warning would you get from the time you actually find out you're going to be posted until you have to be there?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: Normally it's about two to three months.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Do you feel that's adequate time?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: That's what we've gotten used to.

As of April the career managers find out their budget. They have their requirements, and as of this year the budget and requirements aren't going to match. He's going to have a bigger requirement and a lot less budget, so then he's got to have his priorities. I would agree his priorities are to get those people out of those combat units in Bosnia and Haiti; those people are burning out. I can sympathize with him, and I'm willing to do my share, but I'm not willing to leave my family for three years.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I don't think you answered the question I asked a while back. Do you see that the military is going to suffer if you're not posted?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: Some other individual will have to go and fill that slot. What typically—

Mr. Leon Benoit: Will they? That's the first question. Will they?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: Oh yes. The issue seems to be very typical. You're going to Cold Lake and you don't want to go. The guy next to you wants to go. They are adamant about the decision, because they've made the decision. It's sorry, but you're going.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Do you know of somebody else who would like to go and fill the—

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: I've asked around. Lots of people have been here less time than I have, but I haven't run down all my lists yet.

Mr. Leon Benoit: At other bases we've been on during this tour, people have said they know of people who actually asked to be posted to this spot and yet they choose to tear the family apart and send the—

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: Actually, I have a co-worker who asked to go there. Again, maybe the timing wasn't right for the career manager to send him there, because he didn't. We seem to see that a lot.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Again, the Minister of National Defence, the Chief of the Defence Staff, and others have said the military is more family friendly than it's ever been and it's a military that's encouraging women to get into the forces. Now, I ask what woman in her right mind would get into the forces if she ever has any intention of having a family?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: She'll come in without the proper knowledge and then, like some other members I've quoted, find out— It's called expectations and reality, and sometimes they're very far apart. But for any woman who's expecting to have a family, especially to go the route of the recruitment for combat arms— this is politically driven and not requirement driven.

• 1635

Mr. Leon Benoit: Do you think it's department driven rather than driven by the forces themselves?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: We can't keep the women in the combat arms, because it's not a very nice job.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Oh, you mean that, sorry.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: Yes. There are some very good-quality jobs available for technical trades. As for the combat arms, lots of men can't hack it. Again, strengthwise— we are talking about physical fitness. Would you want to go into an emergency with someone who is substantially less fit than you are? It destroys the confidence of that unit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I've heard different opinions from different people in the same position in the military about that. Some have absolutely no concern about it and others do, so I don't really know.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: It depends on where they've been— as a technician, as support, the pointy end—

Mr. Leon Benoit: I'm thinking about it from this point of view. In Canadian society a family is extremely important. Whether it's in the private sector or in government, I would hope the family would be taken seriously and accommodated in any possible way. I have gotten the feeling very clearly from our travels that it is not in the military.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: We have to realize, I believe, the objective. The primary objective is not the family, it is the job. I have to agree with that.

When we had the ice storm, thinking about the families— no, that's a secondary consideration. We had a job. There were probably some supervisors who did a very good job in attempting to accommodate their personnel and their unique family needs, but it's black and white, depending on your supervisor.

Mr. Leon Benoit: The people who have expressed a concern about the way families are treated said they understand, they're in the military, they knew what they were getting into, and they have no problem with deployments overseas. They understood they have to do that. They had no problems going out to deal with the ice storm or the flood. They understood that was part of what they deal with. But it's the other postings such as yours sounds to be— and I don't have the information on it —that are a real concern when the family's being torn apart unnecessarily.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: The decision comes down to the family or the career, and I think the family will win in this one. I will have to let the time pass.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Lebel.

[Translation]

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Mr. Chamberlain, earlier today I was talking to a member of the military in the room and he told me he had been wearing borrowed boots for the past eight months. He has been waiting for his own boots since August.

You tell me that you're not wearing your uniform, or at least not the uniform you would like to be wearing. Are we looking at a serious supply problem here?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: I'm talking about simple things like inexpensive pants. I could even change my parka.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: It might seem that it's scarcity that's causing inflation in prices, but you say that's not the case.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: They had no jackets in my size. The one they offered me was torn and had buttons missing. I suggested to them that they could have mended it, or thrown it out. I can't speak for other people, but in my case I need pants and a jacket.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: You should have joined the RCMP; they have tons of hats. They have 4,000 on the shelves. It's a joke.

• 1640

Colonel Dumais, I would like know if there is in fact a scarcity of the equipment to which members of the military are entitled. I will take my question a little further and ask you if a similar scarcity is affecting other military supplies, such as parts without which planes can't fly for a while. Is this a problem for the military? Our Committee is here to learn more about this. If you have no objection, Colonel, I would like you to answer these questions.

Col. M.J. Dumais: It would be a pleasure. As far as I know, there is not really a serious supply problem in this respect. As you said, it sometimes happens that an aircraft part is out of stock, although it's very rare that aircraft have to remain on the ground for two or three weeks. Some parts for the Hercules are difficult to get now.

As for the supply of uniforms, there are undoubtedly pieces of clothing that are out of stock, but I've never heard anything in particular about boots or pants. The Chief Warrant Officer may be able to give you more ample information.

[English]

Chief Warrant Officer J.E. Fournier (Individual Presentation): The point the corporal is making is that two weeks or so ago a message was sent saying that the army had done away with what they call the garrison dress, and it was effective right away.

Here on the base I gave a one-month raise so those people could get their kits. What he's referring to is that not everybody has a kit right now and because of a shortage in the supply system he's having a hard time getting whatever he's missing.

As far as making the decision is concerned, this thing came out with two types of dress for the army: the CF dress and the combat dress, such as what they have over there. I think it's a great idea. However, they didn't give enough notice so that everybody could get dressed properly. They made it effective right away.

It is a good move. Now there are only two kits to worry about, but it will take at least a month or so before everybody can get their kits.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: I have a question for the chief, to verify something. Is it correct that I will not have a dress jacket with my summer dress? The other alternative is my green winter jacket.

CWO J.E. Fournier: That's the only thing. That's what he's referring to in some of these decisions. Take, for example, the short-sleeve shirt. They don't have any short-sleeve shirts, green shirts, to go with the— we're talking army issue, not air force issue. It's going to take a while for the supply system to have enough shirts so that everybody can order them.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: The issue I see there is this. Imagine the confidence—

[Translation]

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Just a second please, don't leave too fast. Does the "just in time" delivery that we know in private industry also apply to the Canadian Forces at present? Do we not get short-sleeved shirts until the temperature reaches 21 degrees? It seems to me that there's problem, although it's perhaps not a major problem, as Colonel Dumais pointed out. However, it could become a major problem if it's occurring all across Canada, on every single base.

How many pairs of pants and boots are we short of at the moment? Has the Department's policy been amended so that from now on equipment and clothing is only ordered "just in time"? Is that the reason why our friend here is not correctly— I won't say improperly —dressed today?

CWO J.E. Fournier: If you have a week, we can talk about clothing.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Unfortunately, I don't have a week.

CWO J.E. Fournier: The question of clothing is currently a serious problem in the Canadian Forces. Many new rules have popped up recently, including one that's known as "two out of five". Some of regulations are very strict and instructions come down left and right. I don't know where the instructions are getting swallowed up in the red tape, as they say, but it's creating situations similar to the one the Corporal described. It's us, the people in the field, as they say, who are stuck with grappling with the problem.

• 1645

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: You say there are people getting lost in all this?

CWO J.E. Fournier: Yes.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Colonel Dumais seemed to think that it wasn't as serious as all that.

CWO J.E. Fournier: The problem isn't the way things can be out of stock in the system, the problem is the way the orders arrive. For example, we didn't know until Thursday that starting on Friday, or Monday morning, members of the Forces would henceforward have only two uniforms. We didn't get reasonable notice. That's why I gave the people on my base a grace period of one month so they can get their kit. The person who issued the orders took it for granted that all members of the military already have their kit. There may not be enough consultation with people like us. Often these orders get issued taking for granted that the system will be able to adapt to them. Trenton is an Air Force base and there are plenty of things that we may not have . . .

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Mr. Fournier, you said you gave a one-month grace period.

The Chairman: If you can be quick, Mr. Lebel?

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: My friend from the Reform Party had quite a lot more time than I'm getting.

Our Committee will be having a plenary session on this matter at some point. When I see the difficulty that people are having with supplies, I say to myself that I wouldn't want our army to resemble Napoleon's, which marched in all directions dressed any old way. We're talking about our army here, and I wouldn't like this gentleman to spend the summer with his winter parka on.

Do you have strict or firm guarantees that delivery will be made at such-and-such a date, and, I venture to hope, before the end of the grace period that you allowed?

CWO J.E. Fournier: No, I haven't received any guidelines about this at all.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Fine. You've answered my question. I see that there is a weakness and we'll go into this question in greater depth together. Thank you.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: I imagine that if delivery doesn't happen by the scheduled deadline, the Chief Warrant Officer will give us an extension.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: I hope so.

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: It would be easy for him to settle this matter. The problem really lies in the way the decision was made. It would have been better that the equipment be available before the decision came into effect.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Are you going to demand that he turn in his stick?

Cpl Gordon Chamberlain: No, I want him to keep on working.

Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Fine. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

[English]

Master Corporal Dave Hovdestad.

Master Corporal Dave Hovdestad (Individual Presentation): Thank you.

I wasn't going to get up, but there has been a lot of discussion on various subjects here today. I won't bother with pay, since you've probably been beaten to death with that one. One of the things I am going to bring up, though, is the medical system, which you might not be aware of or may be only partly aware of.

As you know, every government, provincial and federal, has been cutting back on medical services and that in terms of expenses. Well, part of it is also starting to affect us now. The military is downgrading the size of our military medical structure, and is leaning strongly towards ASD.

My point is this. In Ontario, they're having a really hard time finding doctors to come to little communities like Trenton and Belleville. Now, a doctor just retired here, and he couldn't give his downtown practice away because nobody wanted to come here to take it. Can you picture having 2,000 military members flooding that system overnight? It won't work.

I'll leave it there.

I guess all I'm trying to get at is that in their headlong rush to do ASD, to contract out to save a buck, they sometimes forget that it's going to cost a couple of bucks somewhere else. So, yes, you may be saving a dollar out of your pocket, but it's unfortunately coming out of someone else's to make up for that dollar.

As for ASD with the food services, my wife and I saw this coming awhile back. My brother-in-law is posted in Esquimalt, and they are the navy version of ASD for the food services. Just a little while ago, they started increasing in price as well. Instead of increasing in value, though, some number-cruncher came out and figured out that it would cost the average person $10.70 a day to feed himself. But when you actually broke down a meal, the average supper was $8, not leaving you a lot of extra money now to have the other two meals of the day.

• 1650

They like to sit there and say that they're saving the base $1 million. Well, that's good. The government can clap its hands and be very happy with itself. But I wonder if they'd be so fast and headlong strong on doing this if I took their kitchens away and said that they had to eat all their meals in a restaurant every day.

So maybe one of the solutions should also be to close the barracks or else supply them with kitchenettes. It doesn't cost me $300 a month to feed myself.

We heard some mixed reviews about the physical standards. All I am going to say in regard to the physical standards of the military is that we keep hearing that you have to be in a physical standard to be deployable, which is the key word they like to use. You must be deployable.

Those of us in the military know that you could point to many individuals who would never pass the physical standards test, but they are constantly ignored. They don't have any career repercussions, but they're going to tell me that if I don't pass the test, I could be booted out or go through a medical review board, etc.

All I'm asking is that if the military is going to make a standard, it should be a standard for all, not a standard for those we choose to put the standard on.

You just heard from a corporal who's worried about a three-year posting and being separated from his family. That almost happened to me and my wife a couple of times. But regardless of that, you were asking for solutions.

One of the obvious solutions, of course, would be to canvass your trade for a volunteer. It sounds very sensible, doesn't it?

I can give you an example, unfortunately without names, where that system doesn't work. There was an individual on this base who was posted to Petawawa, but the other half of the spousal unit wasn't. Another member in the same unit of the same gender volunteered to take this particular person's place. The military came back and said no, it's your turn to go, so you're going. In the end, this particular individual left the military and is now working for the military as a reservist. It almost seemed like they were purposely posting this person to force a decision of get out or stay in.

That's all I have.

Mr. Leon Benoit: We've heard this before a time or two, or maybe more. I've also heard it on breaks when I'm talking to people. To me, if families aren't being accommodated in any possible way, I just can't express how much damage that has to be doing to the morale of the people who are being affected by this.

MCpl Dave Hovdestad: Getting back to this point, it may not be an actual personal vendetta with the career manager, but it does seem strange sometimes. Take me, for example. I only have 18 years in, but if you count all my internal and external postings, I've had way more than my share. I've had almost a dozen. For a while, I had less than 18 months in a unit, and I was being moved.

Yet you'll have other individuals, who shall remain nameless, who have done 20 plus years on a single base. It doesn't seem to be like saying that because he's been five years on this base it's his turn to move. It's like, well, he's single, or well, they don't have kids, or well, he's letter H and not letter G.

It doesn't seem to have any real reason to it; it's very random when it's your turn to go. We like to joke that they took the big board, threw the dart behind his back, and where it stuck, there you go.

• 1655

Mr. Leon Benoit: The other question is on the physical standard. You're saying that it's not only not adhered to for females, but others.

MCpl Dave Hovdestad: Correct. It's not standardized. Because I have no medical condition or I can walk upright, I have to pass the minimum test, but if I had high blood pressure or a bad back that seemed to have been around for 20 years, they tend to waive it.

There's no standard. If I fail it, I eventually end up like you heard: on C and P, which is counselling and probation, as it's known. I then have to go through so many months of that. I might have to go to a medical review board, which usually means a trip to NDMC, where they give me the work-up. If I'm proven to be physically fit, I have one more shot, and if I don't meet it, they can release me as being unfit to carry out my duties.

Without going into names or people, or even ranks, there are many individuals just on this base alone who would not pass that physical test, but they're still around.

Mr. Leon Benoit: What are you recommending?

MCpl Dave Hovdestad: I'm recommending that if they want to come out with a standard, that's all well and good, but then it's a standard for all, not a standard to be arbitrarily pinned on someone, such that if you're a sergeant or better, we can drop it a little more, or if you're female, we can drop it a lot more. If you're going to make a standard, it's a standard. You don't sit there and say that because you've never had a problem, the standard has to be higher for you.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Do you think there should be a hard and fast standard?

MCpl Dave Hovdestad: Yes, I think there should be. We are military. We do have to perform a lot of physical things above and beyond what would normally be expected of somebody downtown. At the same time, all I'm saying is that if you're going to make the standard, make if fair.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Okay, thank you.

Mr. David Price: I just have a question on that. A lot of people, particularly in the military, play a lot of sports and do a lot of different things. I'd say they're very physically fit. But for the types of sports they play, quite often their knees are shot. So they do other things.

How do you do a shuttle run if your knees are shot? You're not going to make it. What happens in a case like that? They're still in good physical shape, but—

MCpl Dave Hovdestad: That's fine, adjust the standard such that if he doesn't have to do it because of his knees. Then why should I have to do it because I have good knees?

Mr. David Price: Can he get out of it because of his knees?

MCpl Dave Hovdestad: Yes. Actually, it happens quite often. It's usually the knees, back, and blood pressure.

Mr. David Price: Okay. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

MCpl Dave Hovdestad: Thank you.

The Chairman: Captain Heber Gillam.

Captain Heber Gillam (Individual Presentation): Recognizing the time, sir, I appreciate the last-ditch effort.

I have three comments to make, not necessarily questions.

The first comment is that I'm married. I'm fortunate enough that my wife is a stay-at-home spouse. For many people on postings whose spouses have to leave jobs, transfer, or make decisions, there aren't a whole lot of benefits in the military to accommodate those people, whether they're moving from an industrialized location, such as Ottawa or Montreal, to a location like Cold Lake or Trenton, where the employment opportunities may be fewer. I have concerns as far as how the morale is going to be at home for people who rely on two incomes.

One of the other issues I'm concerned with is postings and transfers. In my personal case, when I came from Cold Lake, Alberta, and transferred to Ontario, my net home income dropped by 15% to 20% because of income tax increases, PST increases, and changes in municipal services that were provided previously.

There was the comment made by Corporal Gaboury earlier with regard to the change in the services offered for daycare and how much it's subsidized. That's a municipal service. If she gets posted from here to Cold Lake, where that service may not be subsidized, what's in it for her? She loses something.

• 1700

This happens throughout the country. If someone got posted— let's take the worst-case scenario —from Alberta to Newfoundland, where the taxes are extremely high, where HST has come in, where they're paying 15% on everything as opposed to PST on certain items, they've just lost 8% right off their net pay without even talking about the other costs, utility costs.

How can we address that? I don't have any solutions. My recommendation is that we have to start looking at the economic factors in each location, and making sure people in those locations are recognized as having those increased costs, whether it's housing, whether it's utilities, whether it's support services provided by the local municipalities. That's just a comment.

My second comment deals with the public service health care plan. As commented earlier by Leading Seaman Wheeler, that plan applies to dependants. We in the military don't get the same benefits as our dependants do. I can go out and buy contacts for my wife. The military will not provide contacts for me, and if I go out and buy them it's $250 out of my pocket, not out of the pocket of the public service health care plan.

I have no problem paying additional fees for those services, but that's not an option to me as far as the public service health care plan goes.

The last issue I want to address is morale. I joined the military in 1988. We had over 90,000 people in the military at that time. In the last 10 years we've decreased down to 60,000, or we're on our way to 60,000. The rumours are that we're going down to numbers in the 40,000s. That's a real concern for morale and for the people. I feel the military has become a political pawn. I don't think the Canadian public has been properly briefed or properly given the opportunity of knowing what our role is. I think our numbers are strictly driven by budgets, not by the needs or what our job is.

I believe the public has to decide whether they want a military. If they want a military, they have to be prepared to pay for the infrastructure, which, as you walk through 8 Wing or any other wing or any other base in the Canadian Forces, you will notice is sadly dilapidated. They have to pay for the equipment, which is way behind the times, and they have to offer the services to their personnel, whether it's pay, whether it's social services, or whether it's the services of— We're fortunate here at 8 Wing; we have a new swimming pool. We have various other non-public facilities that have been developed recently that help the quality of life, but it's far, far from what we need.

The bottom line is that the Canadian public has to be made aware by our leaders what our role is. Then the Canadian public has to decide whether or not they want us; and if they want us, pay for us. And that's not pay for 40,000 of us, because that will not do the job; 90,000 will.

Do you want us to go and support you in ice storms or flooded Manitoba, or in the Chicoutimi region in Quebec? Pay for us.

UN peacekeeping is a political role. It may not be the role that the Canadian public want us to fulfil. It's a role that political leaders want us to fulfil. If that's it, pay for us.

That's it, sir.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Corporal Denis Jobin.

[Translation]

Master Corporal Denis Jobin (individual presentation): My name is Master Corporal Denis Jobin. I would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you today and ask you some questions.

I would like to start by congratulating the federal government for having taken the initiative of asking this Committee to come and listen to the members of the Canadian Forces. This is the first time in almost 20 years of service I have heard of such an initiative and I congratulate you on it.

At the risk of getting myself into hot water, I'm going to say that there's a leadership crisis in the Armed Forces. They give us scenarios where we see certain soldiers obliged to ask for welfare payments, while certain leaders at National Defence Headquarters give themselves salary increases on the order of 19 per cent. I would like you to give me an answer today if possible and tell me how you can promote the Forces and set a positive example for other members of the Forces, when the staff gives itself an increase of 19 per cent. That, ladies and gentlemen, ruins morale. Thank you.

The Chairman: We will make careful note of your comments.

• 1705

Jon Stonehouse, please.

[English]

Corporal Jon Stonehouse (Individual Presentation): Good afternoon.

The comment I was going to make is basically parallel with the point the captain made earlier on spousal employment. When you get posted, whatever seniority or job placement your spouse had gets lost, and then when you get to a new posting, it seems that the military spouses, even though they are civilians, get discriminated against. They ask what your husband or wife does, and if you say they're in the military, that puts a black mark against you. They say, “Well, you're going to be posted in a few years. We don't really want to waste our time on training you and getting you into this job just to see you go out the door.” That's difficult.

My spouse isn't in the military, but she has a career she'd like to pursue, and it's very difficult.

The Chairman: Bob.

Mr. Bob Wood: We've heard this quite a bit, Jon, in the last little while. How has that affected you? Can you give me a personal example of how your wife has maybe been in the system or hasn't been working?

Cpl Jon Stonehouse: We were in North Bay and she had the job she's always wanted. She's a registered nurse and she's carried on extra training in the operating room, and she was an operating room nurse in North Bay. Then we got posted to Shearwater, and we figured, okay, in Shearwater there are more hospitals, so there are probably more opportunities.

We got there, and she never received a job at all. She had applications everywhere. There's time and money involved in applications, plus keeping up her registration going from province to province and writing exams from province to province, because some provinces don't recognize a diploma in another province. So that's money spent there. She didn't receive a job there.

Then I was posted here, and actually just recently she got a job, but that was five years she was not employed. And actually she didn't even qualify for unemployment, moving from one province to another. She was on maternity leave and then went to collect unemployment; she didn't qualify. You can only collect one or the other. You can't collect unemployment and maternity leave. Her maternity leave finished at six months, and then she went to collect unemployment and she didn't qualify.

Mr. Bob Wood: We were in North Bay last week and heard from Major Sherwood. I don't know if he was there when you were; probably not. He came up with an idea that merited a look. It was a proactive placement office that he suggested could be set up on the base.

In North Bay, I think we're trying to take that a step farther with meetings of the Chamber of Commerce on the economic development of the people at the base, just to see if that would work. I don't know how that would work or if it would. It's something we have to look at. Do you have any ideas?

Cpl Jon Stonehouse: No. That's why I'm here, to ask you.

Mr. Bob Wood: That's the frustrating part of it all.

Cpl Jon Stonehouse: It costs me more to keep her registered than just to stay home and look after my— It's been five years. Once you're out of your trade for so long, you have to go back and—

Mr. Bob Wood: Do more tests.

Cpl Jon Stonehouse: That's right, re-qualify. That costs money, and I can only claim so much on my taxes. With the income I have— and I don't really have to go over the income issue —I have my children to look after, I have to try to get a mortgage and have a vehicle and live, and she wants to pursue her career.

We went through the schooling, we had to pay for the schooling, and now she's a nurse, and then all of a sudden, boom, no. It's frustrating, and there's no compensation as far as income goes. We have to deal with that.

• 1710

She already knows she'll never get up the ladder in seniority, let alone get a job. She's just happy to get a job in her field. Her field is very wide, and she wants a certain thing in her field: she wants to be in the operating room. But that's like winning the lottery now, to get the actual job she really wants, let alone get any seniority or excel in her career as she would like to.

Mr. Bob Wood: Yes. I don't know how we'd fix it, but we have to try to find some way to make sure spouses get a chance to pursue their careers.

Cpl Jon Stonehouse: Well, that's the luxury part of it. If she can get what she wants, I would say that would be a luxury. But our biggest complaint is the income. We paid for all that schooling and then we get posted and— I find it very difficult.

Mr. Bob Wood: What about a tax benefit— somebody suggested that —for spouses, to write off some of the tests they have to—

Cpl Jon Stonehouse: To keep her current, you mean?

Mr. Bob Wood: Yes.

Cpl Jon Stonehouse: Sure. Anything is better than what I'm getting now. I'm getting absolutely nothing.

But also, for income, you're used to making x amount of dollars a year, and then all of a sudden it's cut in half or two-thirds is taken away. If she were in the military, she'd be an officer and she'd be making more money than I do.

Mr. Bob Wood: Yes. Do you have any ballpark figure of how much it has cost your wife to get recertified every time you've gone to a posting? Are we talking about $300, $1,000, $1,500?

Cpl Jon Stonehouse: Well, it's been over the last five years. There's registration each year to keep her current, and then going from province to province, you have to rewrite— It depends on the province too. Each scenario is different. People moving from one province to another, each province deals differently, so it's hard to say.

She's been unemployed for five years. I'd say in the last three to five years, it would be at least a couple of thousand dollars, with resumés. Resumés cost a lot of money. You don't just hand one to one person. She goes to nursing homes, she goes to hospitals, she goes wherever. She's unemployed. She wants to be employed in her field.

Mr. Bob Wood: Thank you.

The Chairman: Ladies and gentlemen, this brings an end to this afternoon's session. We will be coming back at 7 o'clock tonight to continue with the public hearings.

Again, I want to thank you very much for your participation.

[Translation]

Thank you very much.

[English]

The meeting is adjourned.