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]

Wednesday, February 11, 1998

• 0815

[Translation]

The Chairman (Mr. Robert Bertrand (Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, Lib.)): Good morning, everyone. I would like to welcome you to our second information session. We will begin right away by introducing the members of Parliament who are with us this morning. For the benefit of those who were unable to attend last evening, I would ask the members who are here to please introduce themselves.

[English]

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

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

Mr. Leon E. Benoit (Lakeland, Ref.): Leon Benoit, member of Parliament from Lakeland, Alberta and deputy Reform defence critic.

[Translation]

Ms. Pierrette Venne (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, BQ): My name is Pierrette Venne and I am the spokesperson for the Bloc Québécois on national defence and the member of Parliament for Saint-Bruno— Saint-Hubert. Good morning.

The Chairman: My name is Robert Bertrand and I am the member of Parliament for Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle in the Outaouais. I am the chairman of this committee.

We will now give the floor to our first witness, Madam Caroline Dion.

Ms. Caroline Dion (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, good morning.

My name is Caroline Dion. I am the civilian social worker on the base. Before giving you my opinion on the psychological state of the military community of Bagotville, I would like to briefly describe my work and the various social services available on the base.

The base social services now fall into two main categories: services provided by a social worker, myself, in this case, and the services of a team of psychosocial counsellors.

Generally speaking, my job is to provide services to keep the morale of the service members high so that they can perform well on the job and, to do this, I provide consultation and therapeutic services for individuals, couples and families.

I also do psychosocial evaluations of military personnel leaving for missions abroad or for remote areas, in order to minimize the risks of the person having to return home and to ensure that the specific needs of the families are met in that context.

Moreover, I do assessments in situations where service personnel ask for transfers for family reasons. Finally, I can also counsel supervisors on the approach to take with members dealing with certain problems.

The team of psychosocial counsellors is composed of seven military personnel from the various units on the base, whose job it is to listen, counsel and provide guidance to those with personal or work-related difficulties. They are natural allies.

These people also counsel supervisors on assistance that is needed for certain members.

Given their strategic position in the workplace, the counsellors facilitate prevention and identification of certain problems. In addition to this group, there is a preventionist working with the team and myself. Her responsibility is to prevent problems such as drug and alcohol abuse, stress, suicide, violence, harassment, etc.

What are the problems observed at 3 Wing? As a number of people told you yesterday and will tell you today, the lives of military personnel and their families are somewhat different from those of most civilians. For example, they have to deal with geographic mobility, long absences and stress caused by certain operational missions.

In the area of intervention, in which I work, it is difficult to demonstrate, unless a scientific study is done, how much these stress factors will contribute to the appearance of certain symptoms among military service personnel and their families. One thing that is certain is that I regularly meet military couples who have separated because the civilian spouse has decided to develop his or her own career. I meet with single parent military members and with parents whose children are failing at school because they are not able to adapt to the different school systems in the various provinces. I meet with people who are going to be seeing their spouses after 20 months of absence due to training courses or missions abroad. I meet with military personnel coming back from missions with post-traumatic stress reactions, like flashbacks or aggression, which will eventually destroy their families.

• 0820

But I meet in particular with military personnel who are disillusioned, discouraged and demotivated because they no longer have the job security they used to, they no longer have much hope of a promotion or advancement in their careers, or they have to adapt to extremely rapid changes.

As a result, they and their families have a tremendous sense of powerlessness. They feel like they cannot cope. They show signs of stress and an inability to adapt, or what they are experiencing triggers worse symptoms such as depression, personality problems or other mental illnesses.

It is when individuals can no longer function or find no solutions among their own resources or when they are about to lose their jobs that they ask for help from me or from other specialized resources.

Unfortunately, military personnel are so afraid of losing their jobs that they do not dare ask for help. If they do, it is in an emergency situation, when the means to help them have become very limited for us. And that makes them more anxious and less able to perform.

Finally, difficulties we encounter more frequently are relationship problems within couples, transfer requests for family reasons and work-related difficulties.

Dissatisfaction with working conditions has become much more frequent over the past year. It often takes the form of conflicts or abuse of power between supervisors and subordinates or between colleagues. We are aware that what workers are experiencing is not always quantifiable in statistical terms. But we can describe what they say what they feel and what they experience.

As has been said a number of times already, budget cuts have done a lot of damage. The result has been a lack of staff in certain areas. As a result, the staff that remains is overworked. The consolidation of trades has greatly increased the stress on workers. They are now required to have a number of types of qualifications. When they do not manage to perform well in all areas, since there are limits to the abilities of one person, they feel their work is not valued, they lack self-confidence, and perform less well as a result.

Middle-ranking officers seem to be feeling the most pressure, because they have a steep learning curve, they must transmit their knowledge to their staff and they must continue to manage that staff. The efforts being asked of them are almost superhuman, in a context where time is always limited because new changes are taking place.

Another important aspect is that people feel little recognition or consideration of any kind from senior officers for the efforts they make. Having lost privileges in their working conditions, military personnel expect at least some consideration, but that seems to be a lost cause.

Underlying the work-related difficulties for which people consult me, there is often a lack of leadership. It is sometimes difficult, understandably, for long-time members to adapt to change and assume a leadership style that is appropriate to the changes. I also notice that there are young officers who are better qualified for technical work but who are asked to take charge of a group of workers. Despite their goodwill, their lack of experience and qualifications in personnel management increases the number of conflictual situations and the dissatisfaction of the workers.

To sum up, the psychological state of military personnel at Bagotville does not make for a totally rosy picture. Changes in the work and the working conditions affect the physical and psychological well-being of the workers. The stress that they are under makes them less tolerant and less sensitive to others, changes their behaviour and affects other aspects of their personal life such as their emotional state, their relationship with their spouse and their relationships with their children. We feel that military personnel are divided between their obligation to respond to operational requirements and their needs as individuals and as members of a family entity.

We should not be too pessimistic. We need to look at the factors that are contributing in a useful way to the well-being of the military community of Bagotville, including the existence of an innovative team of psychosocial counsellors and the preventionist. These workers are doing an excellent job identifying problems and they help promote the resources we have available to help people. In my opinion, they are fostering a greater feeling of consideration, which is so longed for by the military community.

• 0825

We also note that, generally speaking, where there are supervisors who listen to their personnel, people are coping better and are experiencing job satisfaction. Listening means that the supervisors talk to their personnel with respect despite the pressures on them and their subordinates. They use a participatory style of management. They are relatively available to listen to personal problems that are interfering with individuals' performance on the job and they try to find solutions with these individuals or refer them to the appropriate resources. They transmit their subordinates' concerns to their superiors. However, in order for supervisors to act in that way, they need to have the means and the time.

I mentioned a few of the problems. Now, I would briefly like to provide some ideas for solutions. In my opinion, it would be helpful if efforts were made to transfer military couples to the same base. It would be one way of showing consideration for military personnel and compensating for privileges that have been lost over the years.

It would be helpful to standardize the education systems across Canada in order to stop penalizing the children.

Efforts should be made, perhaps through placement agencies or agreements between the provincial and federal governments, to transfer military personnel to where the spouse can find work in line with his or her qualifications.

It might also be possible to keep military personnel in the same place longer if the spouse wants to keep his or her job in the civilian sector. It would be one way of cutting costs, because there would be fewer transfers. It would also help increase the standard of living of military families because they would have a second income. It would also help prevent families being torn apart by separation and would thus improve the well-being of family members.

It would be helpful if future changes to organizational structures were better planned as to their implementation and timing. Workers would be better able to accept the changes and would feel less stress.

Resource persons should be made available to supervisors and senior officers responsible for implementing changes. These officers would feel less isolated and less torn between operational needs and the need of their subordinates. We are asked to set priorities.

It would be helpful to increase the sources of recognition. Since opportunities for advancement are minimal for the majority of military personnel, it is important to value the work performed and the efforts made. Doing so could help increase pride and the sense of belonging to the organization. The form of management adopted by senior officers is one of the answers to the problem. I feel that difficulty will not be resolved by the annual appraisal of military personnel.

Tools to help people manage stress, such as sports activities, should be made more readily available. Although physical health is a basic requirement for work in the military, there are still too many supervisors who make it difficult for workers to participate in activities because they do not have the means or the time.

Finally, the team of psychosocial councillors should be maintained in the units and their work should be supported adequately. I would like to see that type of social service extended to the other Canadian military bases, since all Canadians appreciate these services.

It would be good to make the role of preventionist an official one. Prevention and identification of problems helps perform effectively and lowers the costs that are required for physical and mental health care when situations degenerate. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Madam. Are there any questions?

Ms. Longfield.

[English]

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Thank you for a very comprehensive report and some excellent suggestions, which I know the committee will try to follow up on.

The one area you didn't mention was work with adolescent children. Are there any services for those young people who perhaps have to cope with the same kinds of stress as their parents? When you're counselling Mom and Dad, is there the opportunity for children to be included in that counselling process?

[Translation]

Ms. Caroline Dion: If I understood the question correctly, most children who ask for help or on whose behalf parents ask for help are... I am not a specialist in that area. I therefore have to refer them to the multiservice centre, which is located on the base, or to civilian services. It might be to the CLSC or private resources in town. But we always make sure we respond to their needs.

• 0830

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: You mentioned that members are often afraid to talk about problems they have for fear of losing their job. Have you ever heard or has anyone actually told you that they have had threats to that effect?

Ms. Caroline Dion: We are not getting translation.

[Translation]

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Mr. Chairman, the question should perhaps be translated for us.

Ms. Caroline Dion: Yes, some people have felt threatened. Certain groups, especially civilian groups working here on the base, have felt threatened because military personnel who have left the Forces have left voluntarily in most cases. I have mostly seen that reaction from groups of civilians here.

Very specific groups of military personnel have had fears as well. I am thinking of those working in the photo labs, whose jobs are threatened. In the case of the civilian groups, there have been staff cuts among the cooks and other specific groups like that.

Does that answer your question?

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes.

You mentioned several problems that members have taken to you. Could you tell me, of all of those, the two that you feel have caused the biggest problems in terms of keeping families together?

[Translation]

Ms. Caroline Dion: What I encounter most often in consultations, are couples having difficulty communicating or managing conflicts. One tends to think that this results from all the pressures on couples. Of course, there are also individual problems. People often lack the tools needed to resolve conflicts and to be able to get along and to communicate. Those are the main problems I find in families.

Another problem among families is the difficulty of adapting to military life or to the region here, in the case of anglophone spouses. Families ask for transfers because they are having difficulty—I see some smiles—finding the services and resources they need here. This is an isolated region. People cannot find work, and access to education is sometimes limited, especially for anglophones.

Transfer requests are almost always related to that problem. In the case of families, this is what we see most often.

Another problem we encounter is the effect of stress on the military member's work, and the repercussions at home. We know that in stressful situations it is difficult to keep things in perspective, to leave all the stress at work and arrive home feeling happy and calm. There is therefore no doubt that stress takes its toll at home and can become one cause of the relationship problems we encounter among couples.

The Chairman: Madam Dion, would it be possible to have a copy of your notes, please?

One last small question from me. When you talk about increasing the sources of recognition, are you thinking about monetary recognition or moral recognition? How do you see that?

• 0835

Ms. Caroline Dion: Moral recognition, to begin with. The director of the multiservice centre will perhaps talk about that later. Money is not always the greatest source of satisfaction for workers. Yes, it is one source of satisfaction, but I think that recognition of an individual's work must come first.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Madam.

Ms. Joanne Simard.

Ms. Joanne Simard (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, good morning to you all. I am pleased to appear this morning before the committee. I think that this is a very special forum. This forum, we hope, will bring short term benefits.

Last night, when we were here together, there was some uncertainty. The reason is that, over the past few years, the Department of National Defence has carried out a number of studies of the military community and spouses. In these numerous studies, just about every aspect was examined. When this is done without any visible follow-up, we start to wonder what it is all for and whether we will see any results.

I think that things are at their lowest ebb and that if steps are not taken quickly, total destabilization will occur. If we are focussing today on the fact that our people are demotivated, it is because that is what we are living through.

I would like to introduce myself and tell you where I come from. I am not a military spouse. I come from this region, from Chicoutimi to be exact. I have been living near 3 Wing or the Bagotville Forces Base for the last 35 or 37 years. These were neighbours we never knew very well. Over the past few years, there has been a certain amount of openness. When I came here, I saw exactly what was going on the base. It is unfortunate that surrounding communities have not really known about the work that is done here at 3 Wing.

My training is as a development officer in social sciences. I am not saying this to brag about my experience, but I think that that experience can help you understand why I am making certain recommendations.

I have worked with community organizations and communities in difficulty, community organizations that had problems that were very specific to the region. That is what brought me here to work in the military community.

In working with these organizations, I have seen the types of interventions and the types of symptoms within an organization like the Forces and I think that it is not normal to find as many problems as in civilian society. There are as many problems if not more, given that, in civilian society, there are people without jobs, people on welfare and people living below the poverty line. The level of satisfaction should normally be a little higher.

In fact, over the past two years, we have seen a great increase in psychosocial interventions. I am talking about a 100% increase. I will give you statistics at the end.

In 1994-95, there were on average 91 interventions per year by the multiservice centre. In 1996-97, this number climbed to 200, as many as in a CLSC, if the same proportions were used. This year, after three quarters of a year, as your heard yesterday from the base commander, there have been 160 interventions and we still have one quarter to go. This is somewhat worrisome.

The problems that arise are those that Ms. Dion mentioned just now. There are separations and divorces. Couples are having relationship problems. We deal with problems involving children, behaviour, violence, physical health, communication and deployments. In fact, you name it, we treat it. It is almost surprising.

• 0840

I have been here on the base since 1992. My first work experience was with the Department of National Defence. At that time, there was a strong community spirit and a desire to make things work. People participated in activities and, to reinforce what the chief warrant officer said yesterday, there was a strong sense of belonging.

Over the last few years, because of cuts in all areas of activity, difficult choices have had to be made. Financial burdens on families have had to be imposed or increased. The best example I can give you is the closure of schools that offered junior kindergarten and that were paid for by the department. As I said to you yesterday, we can no longer count on that service that was available when we arrived. That expense was turned over to parents. Those are choices that are not easy. We always give priority to our children, but sometimes we do not have the means to afford to make them the priority.

Salaries have been frozen since 1990 and the financial burden on our families has been increased steadily. There have been increases in rents and in all costs for sports and recreational activities that their children attend off the base. The children do not participate in activities on the base, and the cost of those activities have also increased over the years.

All this leads me to a comparison, and I thought that your committee would like to be presented with a few figures. We did a survey of service members on the base and compared the salaries of military families to those given by Statistics Canada for the average Canadian family. Statistics Canada said that the average salary of a Canadian couple living on one income, that is where only one of the spouses is working, is $49,850, which is not really too bad. I know that figure by heart. At 3 Wing, of 902 people surveyed, of which 90% were families, the average income is $39,000. This is a gap of 20%. This gap is significant and that is why our families are facing financial difficulties.

In Canada, 60% of couples have two incomes. Here, among the families on the base, 50% of spouses have been able to find a job. These jobs are not necessarily full-time or permanent. Of these 50%, there may be 60 who have a regular job.

This situation necessarily has certain consequences. I do not mean just economically, but we know that there is an impact in terms of frustration and our general living conditions. There is no doubt that a better quality of life requires an improvement in the economic situation of our families.

To follow up on what Caroline said earlier, I would like to talk about deep-seated symptoms and feelings, a profound anxiety. I may answer Mr. Benoit's question before he asks it. It is impossible to identify one or two factors responsible for this destabilization. Short management courses that we sometimes take help us to understand the factors that motivate people. We know for sure that there are a number of such factors and I can give you a short list: a sense of belonging, loyalty, leadership on the part of senior officers, job security, working conditions, pay, recognition from the public, advancement and promotion, and pride in the organization.

When one or two of these motivating factors is not present, the others can be used to compensate. They can be looked at as a whole. Yesterday I was taking notes while listening to the witnesses. I was just identifying certain factors that were listed. Everyone talked about them as being demotivating factors.

We are starting from a very low point. Profound changes are needed. We also need to reevaluate the ways we do things because the family unit and society have changed greatly, not only in terms of status. There are not only the new families who have just arrived, but also single parent families.

• 0845

Society has changed greatly. When I talk about change, I mean not only in terms of status, of new families arriving and single parent families and so on, but also in terms of what our families are like and how they do things.

Whereas the Department of National Defence used to be able to transfer a military member and have his spouse and children follow later, this is no longer the case today. Following our survey, we prepared training modules for the spouses of our service members. I can assure you that, since 1992, we are not dealing with the same women as before. Their level of education is significantly higher than in the past few years. This higher level of education corresponds with what we see in the civilian population in general. The 17% of women with a university degree are going to try to develop a career. This is also true of those with a college diploma or job training. The fact that spouses are better educated is also a determining factor in how we deal with and manage our people.

I thought about this issue all night, and in particular about the career managers mentioned by Ms. Venne yesterday. These career managers are also a big myth for me; I have never seen one. A number of people have told me that they have never seen one either. There is obviously a problem.

I would like to propose a solution. We need to look at family life as a whole, in its entirety. Yesterday we were talking about women who supported their husbands for years. I am talking here about women, knowing that there are also men. But since women are the majority, I will speak about women who, if their significant contribution is recognized, must also be involved in any career action involving their husbands.

We know that the family stress often falls entirely on the women, who look after such things as the children's education, management of the family's affairs and planning for the future. They all have a master's in family planning. It is unthinkable that they should continue to be sidelined as they have been for many years. A number of the women here today would be able to confirm that this is the case. Their wife's influence and attitudes are critical in the career of military service members.

If there are career managers, why not make them into agents such as the ones we see in hockey and football? Why should they not be paid in terms of how well they perform in serving their clients, that is the military personnel? That is not what is done at present, or at least the impression that we have.

When I think in terms of career management, I think about someone who provides guidance, someone who knows me well, who guides me and who understands my expectations. That is not necessarily what people experience here. Many of them are very disillusioned on that score. They have the impression that career managers are merely filling in boxes or changing boxes, just moving the information around.

We have just heard a number of pathetic examples of poorly handled career management. The final result is a compassionate posting. We see a lot of problems. All this money has to be spent to manage problems created by poor career management within our organization.

As some of the witnesses did yesterday, I would like to talk to you about problems involving missions. Concrete measures that require little time should be taken. You heard about military members who go on missions lasting three or six months or who take long courses, which is mentioned less often. They sometimes have to be away for three months on training. Although the stress may not be the same, the stress created at home is nonetheless enormous. Specific action should be taken to help spouses. When everything is on the shoulders of one person at home for a long period of time, some planning and looking ahead should be done. There needs to be some provision for respite for that person.

One of the main problems we see at present is that military service personnel are taking part in lengthy missions and there is no provision for this type of respite because it costs money.

• 0850

By respite I mean child care services. Respite means being able to afford an evening out, a free afternoon, which is important for mental health. Those of you who have children have a good idea, as I do, because I have three children, of how mental health can be affected when all the responsibility for the family is borne by one person.

These are things that could be put in place. For example, an allowance could be provided directly to the spouse who is carrying the burden, according to the number of children she has. It seems to me that this type of measure would not have a major financial impact. I think that we can talk about a major financial impact when a military member has to come home because the financial situation has become untenable. That type of impact has to be reduced and we need to find compromises of the kind I suggested.

I have just mentioned dynamics. However, other solutions could well be proposed, as we all know. My document contains others and I know that the committee will take them into account. I can't discuss all these things here now because I could spend the whole morning doing so.

The last one I'd like to mention involves communications. We discussed this briefly yesterday. Indeed, communications strategies are deficient at the Department of National Defence. The reason why I am telling you this that I worked in media for four years. So I wondered about a lot of things when I got here and I saw that they really sidestepped what needed to be done.

In terms of communications, there is a profound malaise here that runs very deep. When you know that the Department of National Defence is a tool of negotiation with other countries for our government and that it is the government that determines the mandates that will be fulfilled by National Defence, one can say that this department is an important extension of government. Personally, I think that if the government does not state loud and clear that it supports our department, it is making a big mistake.

If the government does not firmly support the department, I don't think anything else can work out. There is a kind of domino effect at work here. It's a bit like an organization whose board of directors doesn't work. It's just too bad, but there will be repercussions for the workers, the public and services in general.

This strategy should be well planned. In the case of the Department of National Defence, there have been lost opportunities in terms of communications. For example, during the ice storm crisis, the directors of Hydro-Québec reported that their workers had done a great deal of overtime without claiming time and a half or double time. Was any parallel drawn with the military who also worked many hours without getting any overtime pay whereas they usually get four to six dollars a day, if that?

We have to issue a clear message to the public. Of course it's not easy for the general public to understand the sometimes technical message that we're trying to communicate. They are the kinds of messages that we're not used to understanding. But when comparisons are that obvious, and that easy to see, a bolder communication strategy should be used.

I worked very closely not with the officer who is here today, but with the one who is responsible for public affairs. He told me that the department's strategy focussed particularly on recruitment and encouraging people to enlist. That's too bad, because if the general public's awareness is not raised, and people don't have a good opinion of what the department does, they can forget about recruitment. There must be concerted effort. Therefore, I think that an energetic communication strategy to raise awareness among the general public...

I heard Ms. Venne suggest that we send a press release to the media or to journalists. I don't think it's up to journalists to promote or publicize the department. If we want to put out a clear message, we must have a clear mandate to do so and organize an advertising or public awareness campaign. You know as well as I do that when you leave interpretation up to others, you don't necessarily obtain the expected results.

Thank you. I will be giving you this document.

• 0855

The Chairman: Ms. Venne.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Ms. Simard, since your referred to me often, I felt that I certainly had to talk to you.

With regard to communications, just yesterday I was saying that the armed forces must take them over. We agree on that point.

Where we part ways is about the media. I'm sorry, but in any event, they are the ones who will transmit your message. Even if you held a press conference tomorrow morning during which everyone thinks everything's nice and rosy, the journalist would make his or her own comments afterwards. Therefore, the relationship between the Forces and the media is very important. Right now, it is totally deficient. On that last point we also agree.

You also talked about communications between the government and the military. I would also like you to discuss communications among the military, because I get the impression that they are also deficient. You didn't discuss that very much. I'm thinking for instance of communications between superiors and subordinates. That relationship seems to be quite thorny. Very often, the subordinate, or an ordinary soldier, wonders what's going on and feels he is not being recognized sufficiently by his superior, and that he can't talk to him. What is that due to exactly? Is it due to the operation of the hierarchy? I would like to understand why we often hear that complaint from the military.

Ms. Joanne Simard: That's a question that may be better put to the base social worker. She receives that type of complaints. The answer I'll give you is a very personal one. It's also a matter of perception because I don't have to systematically meet people who work or who have difficulty with communications.

I think that this communication problem is precisely due to the fact that the message is not clear and not understood by everyone. When you change the way things are done upon arrival, the workload the methods, the roles, not everyone correctly understands his new role. If you compare the changes in the situation that prevailed a few years ago, you're talking about a 180-degree about-face in terms of the organization. It's as if overnight, you changed all the pegs at the same time and said: this is how we're going to operate from now on.

In this new way of doing things, the supervisor clearly reports to other people—we're talking about middle management in these cases—and has not necessarily understood the scope of the task or doesn't have all the abilities to respond to people's needs. He's often overworked; he often has an awful lot of paperwork to do. We know that the paper burden is enormous on bases.

We're well aware that people have incredible technical skills, in terms of operating equipment, etc., but with regard to personnel, there are deficiencies in communications. We've attempted to improve that point. I know that here, at the squadron level, efforts have been made, but there are still areas of discomfort. We get the impression that people would be more accepting of notices if they corresponded to what they want to hear. Communication doesn't always take place both ways. Listening skills are not always what they should be because of the workload, among other things. Therefore, it is difficult to manage this in a clear way.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Thank you.

Ms. Joanne Simard: At your service.

[English]

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I have two questions. One is on deployment. You said you think long deployments are very difficult—I think that's understood—and shorter, fewer deployments would make things much easier. But as long as the government keeps committing Canada to new overseas activity—and the forces certainly aren't increasing in numbers, they are downsizing—it seems as if there is pretty much a choice, between long deployments, as they are now, but we hope fewer, and shorter and more frequent. I wonder which would be more difficult for families: the long, less frequent deployments, or the short, frequent deployments.

The second part of that question is this. Could the difficulty with a long deployment be partially overcome if there were some commitment that the family would be together for a prolonged period after deployment?

• 0900

[Translation]

Ms. Joanne Simard: That's not an easy question to answer. With your permission, I will answer in French, because I can be much more articulate.

Whether they last three or six months, deployments are always very difficult for the family, and the preparation is about the same. When the spouse leaves and they have to get organized, be it for three or six months, it all comes to the same thing. It's also a question of habit.

Yesterday, we got a good partial answer. Indeed, we know that deployments are part of the mandate of the armed forces, of their reason for being. That's the reality. However, are they managed fairly? That question arises. We have people who are deployed two or three times within a short period of time, which causes frustration in some quarters, especially when they see others who have never had to go.

Here in Bagotville, we can't say there have been massive deployments like in Petawawa or even Valcartier. When people are deployed, they are attached to a unit in those places. It's therefore difficult to have an overall vision here in Bagotville, and my experience is limited to Bagotville. However, I still say that deployments should be done fairly.

Problems have often arisen when deployments are closely spaced. Problems in the lives of couples are often linked to the fact that a spouse leaves every two years for six months or every 18 months for six months. This causes fundamental problems in functioning.

I could therefore answer that it certainly depends on the equitable management of deployments.

I'm sorry, but I don't remember the other part of your question.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: I think you've answered it, actually.

I know that with deployment probably it's most difficult for the family that's left at home. But you asked about children. I have five children. I'm away from home a lot, but for a shorter period of time. Something that I've found out—fortunately, another member of Parliament who had experienced this talked to me about it—is that when you're away from the family that much they kind of push you out of the family and they plan on their own. That's to be expected; that's the way you cope. So when I come home I have to realize that and kind of work my way back in, almost earn my way back into the family. Now, I was fortunate enough to have a fellow member of Parliament to talk to me about this and how difficult it would be.

It's certainly far more difficult in the situation that members of the forces are in. I'm wondering if the families are prepared for the effect of, in particular, frequent deployment.

[Translation]

Ms. Joanne Simard: For my part, I would say that the wives of military personnel who have experienced several resources centres when they were members of boards of directors prepared several documents. Certain centres that deal with massive deployments work to prepare for those deployments. They meet the wives after the deployments.

Here in Bagotville, since we don't have any massive deployments in units like this one, we have adopted tools that suit our needs. We try to meet people individually to offer them existing services and a guide regarding departures: how to prepare the children and the wife for departure. The social worker helped me prepare this guide which was approved or validated by wives.

Of course, you have to be aware of the different steps in family dynamics when there is deployment and the husband leaves for six months. However, we always discuss these steps in a very rational manner. We offer very rational services, but we realize that all that is experienced at a very emotional level.

• 0905

We see that people are prepared to accept what we have to offer. We also help to open doors. But in order for them to do things for themselves... We have to push them a bit. That's what we do.

We have a volunteer committee who systematically call the wives every two or three weeks when their husbands are deployed for a long period. That's what helps us and keeps us in touch with what's going on. If the wife prefers not to receive any phone calls, she tells us that for the time being she doesn't feel the need for it. If she does need it, she calls us back. Of course, we respect her wishes. There are indeed people who feel able to function during these six-month absences.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Madam.

Ms. Joanne Lajoie.

[English]

Ms. Joanne Lajoie (Individual Presentation): Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I've been asked by the multi-services centre to speak to you and to participate in the committee to review the social and economic challenges facing an English-speaking person here at 3 Wing Bagotville, Quebec.

For myself, the most difficult burden on my arriving here in Quebec was the inability to find French-language training. After several phone calls and after meeting with base personnel who were responsible for the language courses, I was informed, first, that no funds were available, and secondly, that there was no interest.

With the help of my husband and the multi-services centre, we found eight ladies who were very anxious to begin a beginning French course. I might add that only by speaking to women in the community were we able to find these people.

We suggested to the base personnel that an English ad in our base newspaper might help the English-speaking ladies become aware of these courses. Not finding these French courses in the routine orders.... Women don't get to read the routine orders. That's a military thing.

After being here for one year, I have finally been able to get a French course. This course started for us in September. But again, it was a matter of whether spaces were available for us as dependants. It's a military course. It's not a dependant's course. Therefore the training is for military personnel, not spouses.

We need a basic French course to be able to communicate in this community, to be able to function in this community. There is a night-time course in Jonquière, but for me that's approximately 30 kilometres away. It presents a problem not only for myself but for other people who may have children, whose husbands may work shift work. Transportation may be a problem. And of course it's always financial. Who is going to pay for our babysitter? Who is going to look after your children?

The course is, I believe, from 6.30 p.m. until 10.30 p.m. Thirty kilometres away is a long way to drive back home at 10.30 in the evening.

That's my number one problem with my living here: the lack of French.

Also, we have been given this French course two afternoons a week, three hours each afternoon. It's wonderful. It has helped us so much. But three hours a day is six hours a week. We're just starting into our second semester. We've had approximately seventy hours from September to December. That's not even two weeks of work hours to learn French and to be able to function. It's so difficult.

The next problem that comes to mind is loss of my independence in living here. It has resulted in no choice but to follow my husband to this base. I was not given a choice, and he was not given a choice. Can you imagine how difficult it is for spouses to function here in daily living? Such simple things as finding doctors and dentists become practically impossible when living in a totally French environment.

• 0910

We are forced to have our husbands take us to the doctor, take us to the dentist, take us to the bank. We're like children. We can't explain ourselves when we first arrive here. We need the support of our husbands. Imagine the amount of military time that is taken away from the military unit when a husband has to take his children or his wife to the dentist, to the doctor, to the hospital. There are so many times when we just can't function on our own. Can you understand how frustrated I feel? I had a career for several years, and now I have to rely on my husband to take me to do the simplest tasks in daily living here.

As I said previously, coming to this base has meant not only a loss of my independence, it's meant a loss of my career opportunities. Each time they are posted, spouses are forced to lose their jobs, their positions and future income earnings, which obviously has a great effect on the families' financial situations. No thought has been given to our needs and our loss of future employment opportunities, with the abilities to change locations every few years.

Another problem for me comes with moving our home three times in the last six years. With this constant short-term moving and uprooting of our home, there is of course the emotional loss we are forced to endure each day and every time we are posted to another location. Each move can mean financial losses on the purchases of our homes due to the short term that we are given to build up equity in our properties. Each and every home requires some sort of financial expense, whether it's a new home or an old home. These can also be a financial burden to families trying to provide security for themselves. At many bases, families are forced to either purchase homes or pay rent outside of the PMQs due to the shortage of adequate housing, while the waiting lists at several bases can be as long as a year.

Living here in Quebec poses another financial problem in that expenses are much higher here than in some other provinces. For example, for a much smaller property and a home that has much less value, taxes on our home here in Bagotville are over double what we paid in Greenwood, Nova Scotia. Insurance for vehicles, our home, our license plates, are all generally increased. Again, not being able to work due to the language problem has placed our family in a position with less disposable income. Also, due to higher personal income taxes, all of the above-mentioned extra expenses have their role in causing stress for the military member and his family.

In closing, I hope my views about English-speaking families being posted to a totally French environment will in some way convince this committee that more awareness to the above-mentioned problems is necessary and must be addressed in order to help relieve the stress and emotional turmoil that these difficult situations have placed on military families. Consideration for the future of the well-being of military personnel and their families, by perhaps allowing members more direct input into their posting relocations, will perhaps in some way help to alleviate that stress, leaving one less problem.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much. We have a question from Judi.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Joanne, I want to thank you for your very courageous and straightforward presentation. You certainly have very eloquently expressed what I know so many military spouses are going through. I thank you for doing it.

• 0915

The views that you have conveyed to us are certainly concerns that we've heard expressed throughout our travels in Canada. I know that each of your points is a point that we're going to have to take into consideration when making our recommendations.

You're living through it and have been doing so for quite a long period of time. I'm wondering if you could very briefly give us the one recommendation out of the many that might go the furthest in alleviating your particular problem.

Ms. Joanne Lajoie: I think for myself, again being English-speaking only.... When this posting was given to my husband, we tried very hard to have it changed to anywhere in Canada. We didn't care where we went. It wasn't a case of not wanting to go here or there and being very particular. All we wanted was a posting where we could still function as a family.

It's just so difficult, from being a family with two incomes, to come down to one income. It's so difficult losing, as I said, our independence, my independence. It's so difficult dealing with simple things in life. These are so important to me.

When we were posted, my husband tried very hard to speak with the career manager and explain these situations to him, but it fell on deaf ears. It was like, you're going there, you have no choice—and if you don't like it, there's the door.

My husband has 24 years in the military. He's never refused a posting.

We go with them time after time after time. That's our job.

We don't have children, so I don't have to face the problems for children. But it's still a problem for me.

Ms. Judi Longfield: Sure it is.

As you say, you don't have children and there are a number that do. That problem is quadrupled, I'm sure.

Ms. Joanne Lajoie: Absolutely.

Ms. Judi Longfield: They're not easy solutions to very difficult problems, but I can assure you that they're ones that we're taking very seriously. Hopefully we'll come up with something that helps in some way.

Ms. Joanne Lajoie: Thank you, Mrs. Longfield.

The Chairman: I would just like to add a comment to that. What you've told us this morning we also heard in Cold Lake, and I believe in Moose Jaw, but just the other way around. It was the francophones who had enormous problems coping out there.

Ms. Joanne Lajoie: Absolutely.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Madam. Major Bernard Desgagnés, please.

Major Bernard Desgagnés (Individual Presentation): Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. You already know my name. In this squadron, I have been the acting Chief of Operations for a week now, because the Chief of Operations who was in this position retired. I must fill this vacancy until late June or early July, when his replacement arrives here.

From a personal standpoint, I have a family, a wife and four sons, teenagers aged 18, 16, 14, and 12. They are very active and are doing very well, thank you.

An honourable member: Do you see them too often?

Maj Bernard Desgagnés: No, not yet. I've been asked to make a presentation based on my personal experience and that is what I'll do. The natural tendency being to compare what is done here with the practice in other armies, I'll make some comparisons.

I told you I was acting Chief of Operations. I will not be receiving any pay increase for this job, even though my acting responsibilities are fairly well defined. I am a major and I will be paid as a major, as if I were still the assistant that I was before taking on this position.

• 0920

In the Royal Air Force, an officer or a member who is filling a position for at least 30 days receives the salary that goes with the position. That is not our practice.

I'll now say something about overtime. Here fighter pilots, of which I am one, work an average of ten hours a day without counting outside deployments for training or operations. As far as operations are concerned, I was sent to the Gulf between October 1990 as chief of operations of squad 409 and my family remained in Baden during this period.

For the past year I've been here in Bagotville, I've spent almost five months on deployment, not for the entire period but on two-week assignments or for a month here and there. Once again, my family stayed here. I own a house in La Baie and the children go to the high school there.

When Norwegian soldiers, either conscripts or professionals do overtime in relation to the national work week standards, they are paid overtime without any problem.

I'd now like to make a comparison with the Americans. In Canada when we move from one province to another, our provincial status changes. By becoming residents of the particular province, we pay taxes to the province, we must change our driver's license and comply with whatever other provincial requirements are applicable.

This is not the practice in the United States. Unless the member of the armed forces decides otherwise, he is considered to be a resident of his state of origin. He keeps on paying taxes to the particular state, he keeps his driving licence and so forth. This would result in monetary savings and, more importantly, would make things a lot easier.

In the U.S., members of Congress are much more involved in matters relating to the remuneration of the military and the provision of a bonus. So far I haven't seen anything similar in Canada. We are a bit like the forgotten children of the federal government even though we constitute the largest military group in Canada.

This summer I will have completed 25 years of service. Throughout this period I paid unemployment insurance. After 20 years I'm entitled to a pension. So if I left the army tomorrow, I'd be getting a percentage of my salary. But I'd still have to keep paying unemployment insurance even though I will never be able to benefit from it. That strikes me as unfair. Whenever we raise this point, the answer we are given is "tough"; it's a tax, you can pay it and shut up.

I'd like to mention another point about tax treatment. All members of the military must belong to a mess, either for officers, for enlisted men or NCO's. Fees must be paid. There is no choice about it. In the case of some civilians belonging to professional clubs or associations, there is the right to deduct such fees from their taxes. Once again, this is not open to us. The matter was raised on many occasions but the answer has always been negative. We have never really been given any explanation.

As you know, the country is an enormous one and we are not always assigned to a place near our home. I happen to come from Ottawa. This is the first time since I've been married that I've been so close to home. I've served in Moose Jaw, Portage La Prairie, Cold Lake, Toronto for a year and I've also had overseas postings to France and Germany. Members of the military living far from home do not receive any benefits enabling them to visit their family. There is no support provided for special air rates on airlines, for example. Nothing at all is offered. We are given the same treatment as everyone else even though we are working for the common good.

• 0925

During my 18 years of married life, I have moved nine times. That is perhaps above average, but it is about par for the course for officers. For example, I had a two-year transfer to Lahr followed immediately by a one-year transfer to Toronto. These moves come in quick succession.

Inevitably, my wife moved when she was pregnant and she moved with one or more very small children. That's not easy. She doesn't complain often. My wife and I never used the social services on the base, although we might perhaps have needed to. Together, we gave priority to our family. We spent the necessary time with our sons to explain to them what was happening, and that worked very well.

As regards my wife working, it is difficult when I am away or when we have to move frequently. She could describe the situation to you, but I think it would be very similar to the previous presentation. She has not been able to pursue a career or take job training, and if she finds a job it is often part time or low- paying. Obviously, there is no compensation for a single-salary situation.

The commander told you yesterday that pilots were leaving the air force at a frightening rate. That is primarily because of the wage freeze and the upturn in the economy. The aeronautical industry is doing very well in Canada. Airlines are doing a lot of hiring. The situation was identified at least two years ago, and it will be difficult to resolve that problem by April 1. It's a bit difficult to have an air force without pilots.

In fact we are moving quite quickly to a situation where the pilots in a squad will be almost all very junior or very senior. The people who have been trained and are in their prime as pilots are leaving us. I would reiterate that this is because of inadequate compensation and the lack of respect for our troops and officers. That's all. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Major.

[English]

David, you had a question.

Mr. David Pratt: We've heard about the issue of licence plates here today and in many other places, Major. I'm just guessing here, but I would think the problem is probably getting the provinces to agree to some sort of an arrangement such that people could keep their licence plates. How do you think the idea of a military personnel licence plate would go over with people as a way to circumvent the problem of having to renew whenever one changes one's base?

Maj Bernard Desgagnés: It's an interesting solution. What I would see instead would be perhaps a status accorded to the federal soldiers such that they remain officially residents of their home provinces or their provinces of recruitment unless they choose to change them, as we can do with our federal voting rights. I don't think you will get the ten provinces to agree on a special licence plate.

Mr. David Pratt: That's just it. I don't think we would need provincial agreement if we just went ahead and did it.

Maj Bernard Desgagnés: Correct. I agree. And I don't think the provinces will really lose, because the way the military is recruited there is still a proportional representation from the provinces. Even though the Newfoundlander is working in Alberta or wherever, he'll still pay his taxes at home. So I don't really see what the big deal is. It would relieve us of a big pain, basically, and save a lot of money for the military, which has to pay us, in effect, to change our licence plates and our licences and health cards. It's just never-ending.

• 0930

Mr. David Pratt: And you see the issue of mess dues as being in many respects a cost of the profession as far as...?

Maj Bernard Desgagnés: Well, it's mandated by the Queen's Regulations and Orders. We have no choice. I think most of us view mess dues as a professional payment of some kind, especially when we don't have a choice.

Mr. David Pratt: That's something that has been raised in the past, but it certainly needs a bit more investigation.

Maj Bernard Desgagnés: We're not talking about huge sums. It's more the principle that we're obligated to participate and belong to these institutions. I do so willingly. I don't complain about belonging to the mess, but, on the other hand, why can't I deduct my general assessment of mess dues? To me, they are professional dues.

Mr. David Pratt: Can you give us an idea of the amount on a monthly or yearly basis?

Maj Bernard Desgagnés: The general assessment is probably around $10 or $15 a month, at least for the officers' mess. I can't speak for the others. There's an entertainment portion, obviously, which I think would be debated at length, but at least the better part of the mess dues....

[Translation]

Ms. Pierrette Venne: I would not like to leave you with any hopes which, in my view, cannot be realized. In fact, license plates come under provincial administration, and obviously the federal government cannot do that unilaterally. So I don't think we should lead you to believe things which are not true.

However, it is certainly possible to consider discussions leading to an arrangement under which you would not have to pay all those costs. I just wanted to set the record straight.

Maj Bernard Desgagnés: I am quite aware of that, thank you.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: You started by saying that you had been asked to make this presentation. Could I just get an idea of who by?

Maj Bernard Desgagnés: By the wing commander, given my seniority and my position here in the wing. I'm speaking on behalf, I suppose, of the older major pilots on the base, of which I'm actually the most senior.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Okay.

Maj Bernard Desgagnés: That was the direction. I could frame my comments as I chose.

Mr. Leon Benoit: I was just wondering if it's on behalf of some group of some kind that had kind of authorized you to speak.

You mentioned employment insurance premiums and having to pay those even though you're not eligible to collect, really, nor ever will be. That's been brought up many times as well.

In terms of the licence plates, it would take an agreement between the provinces, but as you've said, there should be no loser in the deal—

Maj Bernard Desgagnés: No.

Mr. Leon Benoit: —and it certainly would help. I think there's enough cooperation among provinces that this could be arranged. It's just a matter of it getting on the table, and the federal government could certainly put it on the table.

On filling positions, you're saying that—and I've heard this as well—there is no extra pay for filling in for a higher position. I don't know of another organization, outside of a very small business, where you're not paid extra if you fill the position for a prolonged length of time. That's a strange arrangement, I would say.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Major.

Maj Bernard Desgagnés: You're welcome.

The Chairman: Ms. Murielle Tremblay.

Ms. Murielle Tremblay (Individual Presentation): Good morning, Mr. Chairman, committee members, ladies, my bosses. I am the manager of the savings bank, la Caisse d'économie, here on the base. Obviously, I am not a member of the military, although I think I do have a little military blood in my veins.

I have been on this base for 30 years, since I started very young, and I think that while there has been a phenomenon of global warming, there has also been a cooling down in terms of motivation. That's what I feel in our offices.

But I'm not here to talk about financial questions. The military community is neither more nor less in debt than the rest of Canada.

• 0935

I was looking at the figures from Statistics Canada. As we know so well, our households have about 12 cents in savings for every 88 cents in debt. Our assets are increasing by only 4%. Therefore, we are going into debt to pay for what we consume on a daily basis.

Obviously, when salaries do not go up at the same rate as consumption, you have a problem, and everything we've heard since yesterday reflects that situation. People have suggested that communication is a way of resolving family problems, but I find it difficult to organize such communication when the only thing people talk about is how they are going to pay their bills.

I believe that money—and this is perhaps an occupational bias on my part—is quite an important subject, even the number one problem. Although I have considerable knowledge and skill in the area of finance, it seems to me that over the last few years I could have also done with psychological skills.

People come and tell us about their fears and feeling of helplessness. They don't necessarily dare consult organizations which are closely linked to the military, since they are afraid for their job, etc. This can often be a problem since you feel a bit uncomfortable in these situations.

One other thing you can see is just how proud people are. There has been a lot of talk about pride. When you lose your identity, your pride, you lose a large part of yourself. What worries me the most is to hear that senior officers and people in authority are beginning to lose motivation. That is very worrying.

We are also losing people with experience. You perhaps think that I am speaking out of self-interest as I am no longer a young person, but it seems to me that when you lose experience you begin to lose the very soul of an organization. It worries me to see that senior officers and people in authority are no longer motivated, and it also worries me to see people leaving the Forces. Obviously, this is a very personal view. I don't have any documents to support what I am saying, but that's what I feel.

We are told that our debt levels are no higher than elsewhere and are consistent with provincial figures. But that cannot be considered as an excuse.

Obviously, our organization is trying to attract as much money as possible into savings. We are trying to remove the taboo associated with savings. Sex was a taboo subject at one time, and in fact savings has become a taboo subject today. Therefore, in our institution, we try to help people to organize their budget so as to reduce stress somewhat, because as we well know stress will affect people's family and work life.

That is what I wanted to say about the way we feel in our office. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Ms. Tremblay. I think Mr. Benoit has a question.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: You mentioned that you have a position in finance on the base. Could I just ask you what your position is? Maybe you had stated that but I missed it.

[Translation]

Ms. Murielle Tremblay: I am the manager of the Caisse d'économie Desjardins, the financial institution of the base.

[English]

I'm a bank manager.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Ms. Tremblay, I presume your institution offers financial planning services.

Ms. Murielle Tremblay: Yes.

The Chairman: Do many people in the military use those services?

Ms. Murielle Tremblay: More and more, and we work increasingly with spouses. There is a lot of talk about the breakdown of the family structure.

• 0940

In today's society, there are two things which are clearly visible: family break-ups and credit cards, something which I forgot to mention and I call “the AIDS of finance”.

Some honourable members: Ah, ah!

Ms. Murielle Tremblay: There is one thing I might perhaps say to the authorities in Ottawa. As you know, a credit card has been issued for troops who are travelling or on mission. That particular credit card was given to them in addition to the one they already had. I myself believe that in 1998 there should be a test given before people can obtain a credit card. But in fact they are offered at large to everyone. Furthermore, it is the government or Department which offers this extra card and thus another opportunity to go into debt. I am against that practice.

The Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Tremblay.

Ms. Murielle Tremblay: Thank you.

The Chairman: Master Warrant Officer René Couturier.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. I wonder if we could come back to Ms. Tremblay for a second. My colleague, Mr. Benoit, was wondering which credit cards personnel were provided with.

Ms. Murielle Tremblay: Diners Club enRoute.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Since you seem to know about this, could you please tell us how the application is made? Is the application made for everyone?

Ms. Murielle Tremblay: The name of the card is not really that important. What is important is that our members have been provided with a different form of credit. Obviously, I have no official knowledge of how the system began, but I think it came about because of administrative downsizing. When Canadian Forces members are away in the course of their duties, they have to submit expense claims on their return. The purpose of these credit cards was to expedite the claims process.

Authorities of the base working on this can of course call me back to order if I'm wrong, but I do think that is why the cards were first instituted. In our day-to-day lives, however, we see it somewhat differently. We see it as an additional credit card.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: I wanted to know whether the credit card application was submitted by the Canadian Forces member himself, or by someone else on his behalf. Is the card guaranteed by someone else? This is what I am having trouble understanding. What is the credit limit on the card? Usually, if someone applies for a credit card, his credit rating is reviewed. But according to what you say, these applications are not scrutinized very closely.

Ms. Murielle Tremblay: Perhaps someone who is more familiar with the issue than I am could answer the question. All I know about are the problems they cause.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Ah, you do see the problems. I understand.

Col Benoît Marcotte (Commander of the Third Squadron, CFB Bagotville): Perhaps I can shed some light on the situation. The card was supposed to make it easier to absorb budget cuts. In the past, when we sent someone off the base in course of his duties, the squadron cashier had to make two transactions. First, the person was given a claim form before leaving. The form also served as authorization for the trip. Second, the person went to the cashier for an advance to pay hotel, transportation and other expenses. When he came back, on his claim form he would indicate actual hotel, meal, transportation and other expenses. Then, he had to go back to the cashier's office to get the balance of his travel expenses. In other words, he was given an advance to cover approximately 80% of his projected expenses, then had to return to the cashier's office to receive the remaining 20%.

The purpose of providing Forces members with the Diners Club enRoute credit card was to avoid making them come to the cashier's office twice. They would only have to come once. However, they were to use the card only to pay hotel, meals and other expenses, or to obtain a cash advance from an automatic teller machine if necessary. This made it possible for us to reduce our cashiers' workload. We were able to amalgamate our administration and financial services. We reduced the number of people assigned to those tasks.

This is one example of the solutions we came up with in an attempt to organize our tasks more effectively and to reduce the load. However, new problems arose, such as those Ms. Tremblay is encountering at the Credit Union.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Colonel, you are worse than a politician. You have not answered my question.

Some honourable members: Oh, oh!

Ms. Pierrette Venne: I asked you who applied for these cards. I certainly did not mean to offend you, I was merely joking. Who applies for these cards, and who guarantees them? if I understand correctly, the credit of the Canadian Forces is not in question here.

• 0945

Col Benoît Marcotte: The credit cards are guaranteed by the Department of National Defence, on behalf of the government of Canada, and given fairly systematically to people who travel a number of times in the course of the year. I do not remember the exact numbers, or the criteria used to determine who is entitled to the card and who is not. One of those criteria is frequency of travel, however.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Thank you.

Col Benoît Marcotte: I am not a politician.

Some honourable members: Oh, oh!

Ms. Pierrette Venne: I know.

The Chairman: Colonel, you might wish to look forward to a second career.

[English]

Mr. Benoit, do you have a question?

Mr. Leon Benoit: No.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Ladies and gentlemen, time is marching on, yet our list of witnesses continues to grow. I would therefore ask each of you to cut your presentation short and to keep your answers brief. I would also beg my colleagues to shorten their questions. Thank you.

Master Warrant Officer René Couturier.

Master Warrant Officer René Couturier (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman and committee members, good morning. To help you understand who I am, I should just say that I am in charge of the aircraft electronics workshops of the 3 Wing Air Maintenance Squadron.

My purpose here today is to help you understand the impact of the Alternate Service Delivery Program, better known as ASD.

After experiencing the ASD study in the 3 Wing aircraft electronics workshops, I am in a position to talk to you about the impact these initiatives can have on personnel.

I will divide my presentation into two parts: the first part will focus on impacts I would call generic, those that are engendered by all studies of this kind, while the second will focus on the impacts on us, on our specific experiences.

The first thing I can say is that personnel feel they have been abandoned. They perceived these initiatives as a lack of confidence in them by their superiors. On the whole, they are saying that their superiors failed to recognize they had the skills to perform the work, and considered services would be improved if they were contracted out to civilians.

The second thing I can say is that motivation is lower. A number of technicians have seen that their positions are targeted in studies recommending either that their occupation be eliminated altogether, or that the most satisfactory part of the work be done away with. Often, it was the tasks presenting the greatest personal and professional challenges that were eliminated. The result is lower motivation, as well as lost opportunities when contracts were awarded to perform tasks that were included in our occupations. Now, there is far less opportunity to take up personal challenges and gain promotion.

We have also seen a tremendous increase in stress and in personal and family problems. Many questions put forward by personnel focussed on their concerns about competing with civilian companies. How can people compete with those companies, who have specialized teams to prepare business proposals, when they have no experience or training in those matters? What are their chances of winning at the end of the day?

Another question we heard frequently was this: Will there still be a job I could be interested in with the Canadian Armed Forces? Will all jobs that present interesting challenges disappear? Will I have opportunities for advancement in the future?

Let's bear in mind that, with our current pay system, pay increases are directly related to promotion. If we eliminate too many high level positions, opportunities for promotion are drastically reduced, as are our opportunities for pay raises and advancement.

• 0950

If my section or my position is eliminated, will I be transferred? If all the jobs and opportunities I'm interested in are eliminated, am I really interested in remaining a Canadian Forces member? And if I want to leave, what chances do I have of finding a job as a civilian?

These personal concerns then become family concerns, and that brings us to the issue we were discussing. Will we have to move? How will my family react to a move? How will moving affect our financial situation and my spouse's job? A lot of people have put their lives on hold. Do I buy a house, or do I renovate my house?

The second part of my presentation focusses more on our specific situation. We were part of a study that had many failures, that lasted for three years, and that did much to raise personal and family stress levels.

One impact of the study was a drop in headquarters' credibility. Because of the lack of planning and direction, and because we so often seemed to come back to square one, people viewed their superiors very unfavourably and began to question their leadership.

Extending the study over three years gave rise to tremendous frustrations, and also caused us to lose many technicians who had a future—

[Editor's note: The witness is feeling ill]

The Chairman: We will pause for a few moments.

A voice: If you like, I could continue with Master Warrant Officer Couturier's testimony, because I have a very good idea of what he intended to say.

• 0953

• 0958

MWO René Couturier: Forgive me for this disruption, Mr. Chairman. It is just that the subject is very important to me, and that might have had an unexpected effect. As I was saying, if I were to summarize the last three years in just three words, those words would be frustration, frustration and frustration. We are right back at square one. We have had many failures. In any case, the process was not well defined in our case.

We had to repeat a number of studies at both the local and the national levels, so that we could finally come up with recommendations after three years. It was extremely frustrating, and we lost excellent technicians. Some technicians with a very promising future left. They liked their jobs, but they left because they could not see any opportunities for advancement within the armed forces.

Another thing happened as well: armed forces personnel were divided into two maintenance sectors for the fighting force. Because of procedure, we were divided into two teams working against one another. Normally, within the armed forces, everyone should be working as a team. But we were forced to work in two separate teams under two separate proposals. This led to a great deal of animosity and has left people very bitter.

The tension and concerns we experienced were due to a variety of factors, though they were exacerbated by the length of time it took to complete the study. Three years is a very long time not to know what the future holds, not to know whether you will have a job, not to know whether you will have to move, and not to know whether tomorrow you will be doing something that really interests you.

That is all I have to say. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

[English]

Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you for your presentation.

• 1000

I have a question just for clarification. You said that one of the questions the technicians asked about what's been going on with ASDs is how can we compete? When you ask that question, do you mean how can we compete in putting a proposal together in a way that can compete against a private company that has all the resources to do that, or do you mean how can we compete in actually doing the job?

Master Warrant Officer René Couturier: In competing in doing the job, there is no problem, because I firmly believe we are the best at doing what we are doing. We've proven that through this study. As far as maintaining the equipment goes, we are the best and we are the cheapest way of doing it.

What I meant was in putting together a proposal. Most companies have a team specialized in that and they have lots of experience. If I look at my own experience, I'm a high school drop-out. I had to put together a team and we had to do a proposal. We did very well. However, it's a lot of pressure and long hours. For example, for our last proposal there were approximately 1,300 man-hours, of which at least 400 were overtime.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Yes, Ms. Venne.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: I did not grasp exactly how many people had left. How many technicians left, and how many did you have in the first place? How many technicians do you still have today?

MWO René Couturier: Right now, we could be losing 10 to 12 technicians. This is not definite. A recommendation is currently under study, and in the process of being approved. We are organizing a sort of consortium between a civilian company and the armed forces. We could lose 10 to 12 technicians out of 57. But this is still a step forward, because three years ago we could have lost all 57 positions. The studies did have some results.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Thank you.

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

MWO René Couturier: You're welcome.

The Chairman: Captain Yvon Martineau.

Captain Yvon Martineau (Individual Presentation): Good morning ladies and gentlemen. I am the Base Personnel Selection Officer and I would like to talk to you about shared custody in single-parent families.

My ex-spouse and I made this choice because, even though I have always wished to pursue my military career, it was important that I assume my responsibilities as a father. Shared custody was popular, and it enabled me to achieve the objective of maintaining close contact with my son and having some flexibility in relation to my various assignments.

Since I have a good relationship with my ex-spouse, I can ask her to look after our child for three months and then do my share later. I did this because I thought my military career would enable me to do so, but now I have some doubts about this.

It is not obvious that career decisions regarding my assignments, be they to the United Nations or to a base for three or four months, are made by those who are in the best position to guide my career, namely, my immediate supervisors, my commanding officer, or the specialists who are here, locally, to help the commanding officers make their decisions, such as the social worker.

As you know, shared custody and single-parent families are a fact. Although we have a mission, this situation exists in the Canadian public and is also reflected in the Canadian Forces. We still value the family, and if we want people to fulfill their responsibilities, our human resources management style must reflect some flexibility. Unfortunately, I do not think this is the case, because decisions are made at too high a level in the hierarchy. They do not sufficiently take into account the opinions of local commanding officers.

• 1005

As the Base Personnel Selection Officer, I had an occasion to review recommendations made by my commanding officers with the assistance of social workers, when they recommended against certain assignments; however, these recommendations had been ignored and Ottawa, unfortunately, continued to issue those assignments. There are no doubt good organizational readings at the career manager level, but human resource management only needs some common sense. I think that more enlightened decisions should be made to respect the human aspect in organizations.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much. No further questions.

Corporal Julie Parent.

Corporal Julie Parent (Individual Presentation): Good morning.

I am corporal Julie Parent and I have been in the Air Reserve for about six years. I currently work in the Loretteville gymnasium.

The point that I want to discuss with you this morning concerns pay in the case of sick leave or injury, particularly when a reservist suffers an injury.

I will give you an example. If I fall and receive a sprain at work, I will be taken off service for three weeks. As a member of the reserves, I work part-time at the moment, about 12 days a month. Three weeks of service represent nine days of pay, i.e., I lose nine days of salary. Since I am a single parent, nine days' wages represents a big hole in my budget.

Therefore, I think that this is an important issue for members of the reserve. We would like to be paid for our assigned days of service, even if we are injured; otherwise, we have nothing. If we are injured, we get absolutely nothing. So I would lose all these days of pay and would have to ask for social assistance.

That's the point I wanted to make today, but I won't spend too much time on this, because it's quite clear. I know that there have been many positive changes for the reserve, such as the salary increases, but I would ask you to consider the point that I have raised. Thank you. That's all.

The Chairman: Corporal, I have a brief question for you. As a member of the reserve, are you covered by the GSMIP health insurance plan?

Cpl Julie Parent: I could join the plan, but that would cost $40. Since I am a single parent and work part-time, I can't pay for this health insurance plan. It would take too much out of my budget.

For you, $40 may not be a lot, but given my budget, it is a large amount. So I had to give it careful thought before deciding to buy this insurance. Indeed, I did think about it, but not everybody can afford it.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Mr. Robert Boudreau.

Mr. Robert Boudreau (Individual Presentation): Good morning, Mr. Chairman, good morning, ladies. I am making an individual presentation, because I want to talk to you about my personal experience.

I have 26 years of service and am now retired. I left the Forces on “G303 permanent” medical status. I will tell you about my personal problems.

When I left the Forces, after 26 years of service, I earned $36,000. I presently receive a military pension of $17,000 gross. After taxes, I get close to $13,000.

• 1010

My statement may be a little bit muddled because I prepared it quickly, but you will understand.

The G303 permanent medical status designation is signed by deposition in Ottawa. The Base Medical Officer merely issues an authorization that is checked by the physicians in Ottawa who determine our medical status.

When I left the army, I applied to Veterans Affairs. On behalf of present and future veterans, I tried to defend my medical case, since I have a chronic degenerative back condition. I won't tell you my whole life story, but you will see that it is not easy to solve problems when you are alone.

To have my back condition recognized, I had to file an appeal. It was accepted only in the second appeal. It took me four years to have my condition recognized. My back was assessed: 10%, 3% attributed to civilian employment and the rest to the army. They quantified the problem into bits, and not much was left.

To finish, I presently receive $171. According to my medical status, I can no longer carry more than five pounds, and I can no longer practice sports as I used to. They don't deal with the issue of morale. I do have morale problems, but nobody looks after that. They are interested merely in the back, and the rest is not their problem. That's what they tell you.

I also have difficulty doing things at home. In fact, if I cannot lift more than five pounds, that means that I cannot use a snowblower or a shovel at home. My wife has to look after this. I asked Veterans Affairs for assistance, and was told that they would look at my file and call me back. That took no time at all. They called back after five minutes to tell me I could not receive any assistance because I had not fought in a war.

So people who leave the armed forces with a back problem, and there are many of them, are not properly assessed. No one deals with our morale problem, with all of the activities we may no longer be able to perform. The officials are only concerned about the injury itself, and even there, they do not take it seriously enough. Personally, I am trying to live with all that, and it's very difficult.

I have asked that the 10% disability pension I was granted be reviewed, and the doctor told me that he could not do anything for me. But someone advised me to speak to a member of Parliament, and that was how I found out that I could come and talk to you.

I was told that according to a law passed in 1944 and one passed in 1949, a person with back pain, who has not had an accident, cannot get more than a 10% disability pension. However, a person with ear problems gets a 60% assessment. One of my friends with an ear problem gets $600 a month, while I get only $171. Moreover, he can still work, while I no longer can. Where is the justice in that? I have nothing against my friend, but he is quite pleased to have both a health problem and money.

Let me give you another typical example. Listen carefully to what I have to say. In 1992, I had an operation for an inguinal hernia. They opened me up on both sides, whereas they normally open one side at a time. This operation delayed my departure from the Canadian Forces by at least three months.

• 1015

Because of these problems, my departure from the Canadian Armed Forces was delayed by at least three months. I came back and submitted the assessment from Veterans Affairs. I had explained my problems to them, and they tried to defend my case.

I took my case to the first appeal level, even though my lawyer told me that my case was hopeless from the start. It is not much fun to be told that when you are trying to defend your position. I then took my case to the second appeal level, and it was rejected once again. The third appeal was in Charlottetown, something I did not appreciate very much, and the gentlemen at the other end decided that my problems were not related to the Canadian Armed Forces. And yet I was operated on by their doctors. I slept in their hospital and I worked in the Forces for 26 years. I submitted six letters and some supporting photographs, but I was simply turned down. I was told that if I had any problems, I should hire a lawyer. However, since I get a salary, I'm not entitled to legal aid.

In addition, I'm trying to work as best I can. I am not entitled to the services that welfare or unemployment insurance recipients get. My meagre income amounts to about $13,000 a year, and yet I'm not entitled to legal aid. The same goes for everyone who retires from the Forces—we are stuck. The situation is not as bad for people who are earning a good salary and are sure they have some money.

Despite all that, I am the type of guy who plans ahead. I knew I was going to retire from the Forces, and I managed to pay off my house. My wife is by my side. Despite my meagre income, I planned ahead, and it's a good thing I did. Otherwise, I don't know what I would do today. I might have a rope around my neck. And it would be your fault.

That will be all.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

[English]

Mr. Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Mr. Boudreau, I think you explained your situation clearly and I understand what you are saying, but were you in fact injured on the job or were you injured in some other way?

[Translation]

Mr. Robert Boudreau: Because of the job I was doing and the inadequate equipment I was using, the injury got worse over the years. The legal documents I have show very clearly how the situation progressed from year to year. That is one of the reasons why I won. Without these documents and the note made by my military doctor, I would have had to pay the bill. I would not have received anything. What helped me was all this documentation compiled over the years.

I was even blamed for not complaining to the doctor. I gave 100% to the Canadian Forces, and there are enough people here to prove that. I never counted the hours I put in.

It is wrong to think everything will be great when we take our retirement. That is when we experience major problems, because we are left completely alone, without any support. You have heard about the problems experienced by military personnel on the base, but I am out there struggling all by myself. I don't have the services of a lawyer. I have no one to help me, and they know I cannot afford much. My wife and I find this a most unpleasant situation. My wife works for the Forces. She is not here today because she is sick, but she would have liked to have been here to tell you her story as well. We are really having a difficult time.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: When you went to Veterans Affairs and they said that your injury wasn't job-related, or something to that effect, what was their reasoning on that? What was their explanation of how your injury wasn't job-related?

[Translation]

Mr. Robert Boudreau: That is the only reason they gave me. I do not have my lawyer. The lawyer who represents me works for the department. Since my salary is not very high, I cannot argue against that. All my representations are made in writing. They decided that my injury was not attributable to the Forces.

• 1020

My bosses signed some letters for me; I had six of them supporting my application, together with photographs. They did not take them into consideration. I did not work outside, because I was working for the Canadian Armed Forces. My job was to work in emergency situations, on emergency equipment. The equipment is heavy, and we have no lifting devices. Nevertheless, we had to get them out under difficult circumstances, from places that were quite inaccessible. I did that for 14 years. Thank you.

The Chairman: Would the woman at the other microphone like to comment? I would ask you to be brief.

Ms. Isola Bouchard (Individual Presentation): It is always difficult when we have to deal with civilians—excuse me, they are not civilians, but rather military personnel—who were not in the war. There is a double standard. I would like to know who the judges are when we go to the court to get a pension. I was told that these were patronage positions.

I would like to see former members of the military judging other military personnel who go before the court to get a pension. It should be a special court. There should be ordinary people judging cases such as the one put forward by this gentleman. I find this completely incomprehensible.

The same goes for people in the navy and air force. If they were judged by military personnel, there's a better chance they would have a fairer hearing than if the cases heard by civilians who know nothing about military life. I would like to make the following recommendation to all military staff here. If you have a pain in your toe, your head or elsewhere, do not hesitate to get it into your file. Otherwise, when you leave the army, if your file is blank, you will not get anything, even if you have the worse disease imaginable. If nothing appears in your file, you will get absolutely nothing. They will do absolutely nothing for you.

I will give you my telephone number, sir, because we have some things to talk about.

Mr. Robert Boudreau: Thank you.

Ms. Isola Bouchard: I have something I should announce. Last night, I sent out an SOS, and I should tell you that a woman, not from the department, but from Ottawa, looked into the gentleman's case. We will definitely be getting some good news about his stay in the military hospital which is reserved for veterans of the Gulf War.

The Chairman: Thank you.

Ms. Isola Bouchard: In any case, I would like to thank all of you very much.

The Chairman: Sergeant Tremblay.

Sergeant Jean Tremblay (Individual Presentation): Good morning, everyone. I am sergeant Tremblay and I belong to Squadron 439 here on the base. For those who may not know there is a rescue team here in Bagotville.

I would like to raise a number of points. After long discussions among colleagues, we are really wondering where we are headed here in Bagotville, and also where we are headed elsewhere in the country, where there are Rescue Units. There are a number of myths about the search and rescue technicians in their orange suits. Some people think technicians are a separate group, that they get a different wage from everyone else.

I will tell you my story briefly. I was an aircraft engine mechanic before I changed trades. I therefore was a technician for four years. Subsequently, I changed trades and became a rescue technician. It takes a minimum of four years in the Army in order to take that course.

When I changed trades, there was no salary change; it stayed the same. It was the pay of a specialist 1. Most of the people to whom my colleagues and I speak, and who are members of the Forces, are very surprised to hear that we are specialist 1 and that we get the same salary as an aircraft engine mechanic. There are a number of trades here on the base that are at the same pay level.

So even though we wear orange suits, the salary does not change. The only thing that changes is our risk premium. If you get injured, you lose your risk premium. You wind up working in an office and that's the end of it.

• 1025

I injured myself recently, but I was lucky to have recovered quite well. I could have lost all the prestige that goes with working as a rescue technician. That would have been a significant loss for me. My good health is what saved me. I was able to resume my duties quite quickly.

Some aspects of our job are quite demanding. The medical training requirements for our trade are quite high. Our trade is evolving all the time. We are asked to reach higher medical levels—up to EMT-2—for those who are familiar with the system.

We also have to do parachute jumping, mountain climbing, and underwater diving. We have to be crew members of various types of aircraft, including the helicopter here in Bagotville, or on other types of aircraft if we are part of large teams where there are more search and rescue technicians. We work on two types of aircraft. So there are different techniques within the aircraft. Planes are a means of transportation for search and rescue technicians, a way of reaching the scene. Our work begins once we arrive on the ground.

Sometimes we have trouble making some people understand that. They say that ours is an expensive trade that requires a great deal of training. That's true, but there has to be a very high level of training in order to take part in missions that may be extremely demanding. I've been doing this for 14 years. I have taken part in some missions that were not very pretty. However, some missions were relatively easy, but the stress level and the responsibility placed on search and rescue technicians are very high.

Sometimes, it's frustrating when people ask why we are so poorly paid. I think most technicians in this trade are proud to wear the orange uniform and proud of the public service they provide. We deal with many military and civilian organizations, and even with people engaged in outdoor activities, hunting, fishing, and so on.

There are roughly 130 of us in the squadron. A lot of discussions are currently underway, and we are losing many of our experienced technicians. It is frustrating to see that, because we work with good men. Many of them are frustrated because of the budget cuts, the lack of training and situations that are imposed on us. Here in Bagotville, there are only four technicians working on the base and responding to calls.

Normally, there is just one of us per helicopter. I do not know if you can imagine the size of the CH-146, the Griffon helicopter that we have here in Bagotville. When we work on it, we are always bent over, the compartment is extremely small, and it is very difficult for a person to work in it comfortably. We are always bent over, and when we bring a casualty on board, the compartment gets even smaller. In winter, when there has been an accident, we need to start I.V. or provide rather advanced medical care. That is not the most comfortable place to work. It increases the stress level.

When you go into the forest in the summer, there are a lot of flies; in winter, it can be a minus 30-degree night, etc. Only one technician goes down the cable. I do not know if you've noticed, but there are not many ambulance services that operate with only one technician.

There are not all that many people on the base, but we feel that the resources are underused. We could be used more and offer a higher level of service to francophone and even anglophone communities, because we can cover a very large area with the aircraft in Bagotville. We respond to calls from Ontario, and not surprisingly, we also cover calls from the coast, because the helicopters in Labrador are currently being replaced by the new Cormorans.

• 1030

SAR technicians are not the only ones in this situation. I am also talking about technicians, mechanics, flight engineers, and pilots. Personnel has been reduced to minimum levels across the entire squadron. It is very difficult to function, and people wonder why morale is low. Personally, I have no trouble understanding why so many people are affected.

Two studies were conducted on SAR technicians salaries. We never saw the results. Our superiors, in our trades, are currently discussing this matter, because a lot of people are leaving. Frustration is running high. I do not know how this situation will turn out. We are hoping for the best, because others are preparing to follow suit. With only 130 people, we cannot afford to lose many more.

We lost about one fifth of our personnel when an offer was made under the Forces reduction plan. If the same program were available today, I think we would lose even more. It is not because people do not want to do work. It is all due to the level of frustration.

I will not dwell on that anymore, as I would like to address language courses. My wife and I had a long discussion last night. We had a bit of trouble falling asleep, as we had quite the adrenaline rush. We came to the conclusion that we were lucky when we arrived here. We greatly appreciated the French course offered by the Employment Centre in La Baie to which my wife had access. That really helped our relationship. She's presently enrolled in an advanced class and it is going well.

I would like to point out that the Bagotville base does have a good system. I have been posted to other bases, and I've spoken to others who have been posted to other bases, be it in Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island or Greenwood, Nova Scotia. Their francophone spouses did not have an opportunity to take English courses.

That sums up my remarks.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Sergeant. Two members have questions for you.

[English]

Mrs. Judi Longfield: Sergeant, I want to thank you for your presentation. You're the first member of the Orange Unit, as you call yourselves, to appear before the committee in this round, and you certainly have given us more information that we're going to need when making our deliberations.

You mentioned that a number of the SAR technicians are leaving. Can you tell me where they're going, to what civilian jobs specifically?

[Translation]

Sgt Jean Tremblay: I will answer your question in French, because there a lot of francophones here.

[English]

It's not that I cannot speak English.

[Translation]

It depends. Many people move into the medical field and do ambulance work. Others work as firefighters or for security companies. Some adjustments have to be made and courses have to be taken in order to work for a company as security technician. then there are the platforms.

Some technicians are there now, and the platforms are looking for more service members. They are currently recruiting. Even civilian SAR companies on the East Coast are recruiting. I would say that the majority if not 99 per cent of the people in SAR on those aircrafts are former SAR technicians.

[English]

Mrs. Judi Longfield: You further indicated that you feel that the SAR units are underutilized, underdeployed, and that you could actually be going farther afield.

What's the range of the Griffon?

• 1035

Sgt Tremblay: I didn't mean the fire unit.

[Translation]

I was talking mainly about Bagotville, because it is the first francophone unit. I was here for the inauguration of the SAR technician unit. Before that, there were rescue helicopters. But they carried firefighters or hospital staffs. We came along in 1994 and set up the SAR technician unit.

Things have changed, and we have made SAR capabilities in the region more versatile. Before that, personnel had the minimum qualifications required to be deployed in the forest or on a cliff. If we reinforced these small units, whether they be in Cold Lake, Alberta, Goose Bay, Labrador, or Bagotville, Quebec, with additional pilots, flight engineers or technicians, we would improve the quality of rescue operations in these regions.

The Griffon has a range of about three point five to four hours, depending on the equipment on board and the way the aircraft is configured. We can easily reach fairly isolated areas, even in Quebec. We have in the past gone to the northernmost parts of Quebec to assist the Inuit.

[English]

Mrs. Judi Longfield: I have just one further question. It has to do again with the vehicle. How many injured persons could you transport at any given time? Aside from the limitations you're talking about, how difficult it is to work because of the height constraints in there, can you tell me more about your—

Sgt Tremblay: It depends, again, on the configuration of the aircraft. If we go for a major crash, we would configure the aircraft differently from what we have now. Now we're based on rescuing a couple of people. If we know we are going for a big plane, of course we are going to bring a fair amount of personnel on board the chopper and start doing triage on the ground. Then we'll get more helicopters from here or from other areas to come and assist and start evacuating people. But at any given time, the way we're flying now, we could carry two or three people lying down. That doesn't leave much headroom.

Mrs. Judi Longfield: No, I can appreciate that. I often have trouble with headroom.

The Chairman: David.

Mr. David Pratt: Judi has asked a number of the questions I had intended to ask, but I have just one other question about the type of equipment you're using. Will the Cormorant be replacing any of the Griffons you're using right now? It sounds to me as if what you're saying is that the Griffon wasn't intended for the role it's currently doing.

Sgt Tremblay: No, the Cormorants aren't going to replace any of the Griffons. The Cormorants are replacing the Labradors.

Mr. David Pratt: Yes, I realize that. You're not going to get any of those helicopters?

Sgt Tremblay: No, we're not. This is a smaller unit. The big star units have more personnel. Our principal role here in Bagotville is the CF-18s and the T-birds. We're there in support of the training they are doing. They don't really use us in deployment. You never know, the future might be different, but at this time our primary role is base rescue. If they are on a training mission and they have to eject, we have to be there and find and rescue those pilots.

As a secondary role we are asked to respond to any civilian crisis, be it a plane crash or an earthquake or whatever. Whatever the reason, with the authority of the base commander, we are asked to react.

The Chairman: Thank you.

[Translation]

Mr. Georges Thibault.

Mr. Georges Thibault (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, my name is Georges Thibault and I am retired from the Canadian Forces. On September 3, I was released for medical reasons, and I realized that the military and civilian world were very different. The support that I was accustomed to receiving in the Forces disappeared as of September 3.

• 1040

I realized that I had to fight for disability insurance, with the Department of Veterans Affairs and for employment insurance. No one wanted to give me what I had paid for during my 12 years of service.

For example, because I was released for medical reasons, the employment insurance people told me when I first applied that I was not eligible. I could not work because I was released for medical reasons.

The Army simply indicated on my “blur” that I was on a 3b release. A 3b release means that I was no longer able to perform my trade. However, it did not mean that I was incapacitated.

It took me two and a half months to explain to the employment insurance people that I was not incapacitated and that I was able to work. But finding a job here is not easy. When I did find another job on the base as a civilian, they said to me a week later: “Oh, Mr. Thibault, you can work.” If I had not found that job, my wife would have had to provide for me. I did, however, pay unemployment insurance for 12 years. I do not see why I had to fight with them.

Perhaps the obvious solution to this problem is simply not to indicate a ground 3B on the Army transcript. In the army, we know what ground 3B means. However, this is not the case in the civilian world. The civilian world does not know what this means and this results in all kinds of unnecessary delays.

Furthermore, when we are discharged, before we leave, we are given a sum that is the equivalent of our monthly pension. I was given $728 and a few crumbs. That was okay, but it took them two months to send me this amount. And when they sent me the cheque, there was a 3 cent difference between their calculation and the amount of the cheque I received and I had two wait two months before getting it. They should have started sending me my pension when it was owed to me. This pension belongs to me. I worked for it. It was mine. There was no reason for making me wait two months before sending me the money.

They say that they have to review all of the documents to make sure, for instance, that they haven't overpaid, etc. They should keep back 10% in case of any mistake and they should start sending you the money. This money belongs to you. You've worked for this money. It belongs to you. That would avoid a lot of problems when the banks call you about payments, etc. You know you can pay them, but the organization is not giving you the money to which you are entitled. There is no reason for these problems to occur.

When you leave at the age of 37 with 20 years in the army, planning is perhaps a little bit easier. However, when you have 12 years of service in the army and your wife gives birth two weeks after your discharge... You can do some financial planning when you receive a salary. With my salary, it was a bit more complicated. I would have been able to manage if I had been given the money owed to me. My wife and I would not have had the stress of the banks calling us at 9 o'clock or 10 o'clock in the evening, because it is legal in Canada for a bank to call you at 10 o'clock at night to request payment. We don't need this.

It's hard enough making the transition between military and civilian life without having to deal with all of these little irritants.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has been mentioned twice this morning. I do not understand the relationship that exists between the Department of National Defence and the Department of Veterans Affairs. In my opinion, these are two organizations that should be closely linked. You're dealing with the same people. If you've gone to war, you have been part of the army. If you have served in the army, you are entitled to a pension from the Department of Veterans Affairs. These two departments should be talking to each other. Communication between these two departments does not or almost does not exist.

My case was resolved when, after making constant calls to Ottawa, I managed to talk to a woman who was nice. I wish I could recall her name because she is perhaps the person who did the most to help me with all of this. She called the Department of Veterans Affairs to say: "Yes, he has been discharged." The Department of Veterans Affairs did not recognize my severance documents or my transcripts as being confirmation that I was no longer part of the Army. They don't want to pay you and they don't let you see a doctor until they have confirmation that you are no longer in the Army. If you can't see their doctor, you can't receive a pension.

Once again, you are entitled to this money. The National Defence Act grants us a pension if we have been injured while serving. We have this right. I was a corporal. I was entitled to receive a pension; I know that I was entitled to this. In order to get this pension, do you know how hard you have to fight, how many telephone calls you have to make, how many times you are told that someone will call you back?

• 1045

I began this procedure three years ago, and it's a good thing that I began three years ago. First a group of experienced nurses review your file and decide whether or not to approve your application. My application, like 90% of all applications, was turned down.

Next, I appealed, with the services of a lawyer who was supposed to represent me. However, they changed my lawyer on me two days before the hearing. I never spoke to the new lawyer before the hearing. She didn't know my file. She read my file a half hour before the hearing.

Four months later, I received a written decision stating: “Mr. Thibault, three-fifths of your injury are related to the military.” I don't know where they came up with the other two-fifths. I never worked anywhere else other than the army. How did they come up with that? I don't know. That's what they said.

In addition, the judges who heard my appeal were two notaries. Is a notary qualified to decide what is a medical issue and what is not? Could someone explain that to me? I just don't get it. I had to face two notaries who didn't understand the military system. When I told them that my knees hurt, they said: "But, Mr. Thibault, why did you continue to run if your knees hurt?" I replied that I had no other choice but to run because I wanted to keep my job. If the army doctor was telling me that I was able to run and that he was going to remove the medical restriction, well I had to maintain the same physical standard as everyone else. That meant running, keeping my mouth shut and putting up with the pain. I did this as long as I could and I would have continued doing this but the doctor finally said that I should no longer do this. The doctor stated that I could no longer do this. I therefore stopped running and they kicked me out.

So you leave with that and you submit an application to Veterans Affairs. You can forget about what the army doctor wrote on your documents, hell, forget that. I would have had to go see the doctor every time I had a small pain in my knee. Every time I got a splinter in my finger, I would have had to report the matter. Every time that I hurt myself, I would have had to have an accident report signed by my commanding officer. Do you know how many times you hurt yourself in the army without necessarily seeing the doctor? We have a job to do.

In civilian life, do you go to see the doctor every time you get a small bout of the flu or you bang your knee? We cannot allow ourselves to do this in the military either. In military life, when you see the doctor too often, you start getting singled out. They start saying that you are a problem case. You become an administrative problem. So, what do you do? You put up with as much as possible and, when you do go, it's for a really good reason. It's not always a damned accident that hurts you.

I would really like to see civilians march twice a week carrying a 50-pound rucksack on their backs, wearing combat boots that are not designed to meet our requirements. This problem was identified perhaps 20 years ago. We have to do this twice a week. When your knees ache and you have to do this, I would say this is deterioration. This is not an accident. If Veterans Affairs think otherwise, you're in for a long ride in proving it. Two notaries are going to tell you whether or not you're entitled to the benefits.

You can tell by the questions that the notaries ask you that they don't have any knowledge of the military system. They are not familiar with it. We have a role to play. We are, first and foremost, soldiers. This is what they like to tell us. I accepted this because this is why I had signed up. I knew that I was first and foremost a soldier. My job was to be a soldier. Then, I had to ply my trade. I had a duty to fulfill and I accepted that. The way I saw it, if I were able to fulfill these duties, I would last. They asked me to go to Somalia. Four days later, I was in the plane. These are small sacrifices that we make for our wonderful organization, because we tell ourselves: “We do not have a trade, we have a profession. We do this because we like it”.

However, we finally come to the realization that we make the sacrifices throughout our career and, when we need the organization, it looks the other way. I worked with some good officers. I'm not talking about the supervisory level, which is quite close to us. Even if the commanding officers are not really close to us, I have always had good support from them. The chaos begins when you go beyond the unit level. At that point all they see is the personnel file and a medical file.

• 1050

They don't know who you are. They are tough, even if your last annual report was outstanding. They couldn't care less about all of the reasons given. They couldn't care less that you went to see the doctor because you were no longer able to run every day. You did manage to run three times a week. In order to run 5 km three times a week, you must be in as good a shape as three quarters of the Canadian Armed Forces. You have to fill out a questionnaire: Can you do this, can you do that? You're honest and you answer "no" to some of the questions. The process begins and you get kicked out.

After this all happened some of my officers and commanding officers told me that I should have lied. If I had to do this all over again, I would lie. I would answer "yes" to all of the questions and it would have been up to them to prove the opposite.

However, that would not have resolved the problem, because I would have gone on running and putting up with the pain. The soldier is in a vicious circle, and I hope that this committee will be able to deal with these problems. When you are in a lower rank, when you are a private, a corporal, a master corporal... It's a lot easier if you are part of the higher ranks.

The little guys like us don't have any recourse. We have to keep our mouth shut and put up. And when you stop putting up, the procedures to kick you out begin. And once you're out, you have to start fighting with the Department of Veterans Affairs. The Department of Veterans Affairs doesn't recognize what the military doctors say. You have to do battle with employment insurance, because the grounds indicated on your discharge papers are written in military jargon: ground 3B. Do you know what a 3B is? The poor clerk working in Jonquière couldn't care less about 3B.

It is essential that these problems be resolved at the Department of Veterans Affairs. I don't know whether or not it's necessary to amend the National Defence Act. This legislation has not been amended in quite a while.

I met with a doctor from the Department of Veterans Affairs in Ottawa. He told me: “Yes, I received it in the mail.” But this was six months later. I didn't know. I knew that I was entitled to a pension; I didn't know what type of pension I was going to get and I didn't know to what extent they considered me disabled. Six months later, I received an assessment: “You are 20% disabled.” I can't complain about that, because I thought that I would be getting less. I was found to be 20% disabled, however, I am much more disabled than that, because I can no longer do what I need to do in life. I can't do any yard work anymore. When my knees ache, it's my wife who has to bring the groceries into the house. When it's time to bring a child upstairs, at night, my wife does this when my knees hurt. I'm supposed to be a man. That's supposed to be my job. But I have to live with that.

And then, three months ago, I got a letter telling me to go and see a doctor in Quebec City. The job of the district doctor is to reduce the 20%. The people in Charlottetown, in their great wisdom, decided that 20% for the knees was not enough.

They did not realize that it takes two knees to walk, and then there are the feet and ankles. You need your knees in order to get around. I cannot walk on my hands. If my knees hurt, it affects everything. It affects my ability to get about. When I shovel the yard because my wife cannot do it, do you think I'm in a good mood the next morning? It is almost impossible for me to sleep after that.

The Chairman: I apologize for interrupting, Mr. Thibault. A number of other people would like to testify, and I know that some members of Parliament would like to ask questions. Have you almost completed your remarks?

Mr. Georges Thibault: I will summarize. I will not be long.

The Chairman: Fine.

Mr. Georges Thibault: I would like to make a few recommendations.

The Department of National Defence and the Department of Veterans Affairs should talk to each other. When a military doctor throws us out for medical reasons, he should have to send his report to the Department of Veterans Affairs, so that everything is clear and accurate. If they have a reason to get rid of us, they must have a reason to give us a pension.

Second, the judges on the appeal courts must have some experience with the army. They need not necessarily have been members of the military, but they must understand the system.

Third, we should be entitled to be present at our appeal in Charlottetown.

In the army, the standard should be the same for the CDS or for a private. If some people have to run 10 kilometres once a year with a rucksack on their back, everyone should have to do the same.

• 1055

In addition, we should know whether they ran the distance or not, because we are judged on that. In addition, there should be better support at the time we are discharged. There is always wonderful support from local units, but there is a problem at the top. They could give us the pension starting with the first month, because they can calculate it within one cent. That should be done right away. That would avoid some problems. I have finished. Thank you.

[English]

The Chairman: Mr. Benoit, you had a short question.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Mr. Thibault, we have heard similar concerns about the way members of the military are treated when they are injured. We have heard quite a few stories like that before. I am wondering if you have talked to others who have been injured. If you have, have you heard mixed results? Have you heard some that have been dealt with very quickly and well by the military, or have the people you talked to all been treated shabbily and has it taken a long time to get any compensation at all?

Mr. Georges Thibault: I could tell you a little story. My promotion to master corporal came up two years ago. At the same time, a promotion to a master warrant officer came up. The master warrant officer was in the same category as I was. His category was lifted for about three weeks and mine wasn't lifted. He was promoted and I wasn't. I went on SMRB and he went on to be a master warrant officer. Does that answer your question?

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes, thank you.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr. Thibault. Captain Luc Gaudet.

Captain Luc Gaudet (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, committee members, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak to you this morning. Initially, I did not intend to speak; I preferred to leave that to people with real problems. However, following a brief discussion at the officers' mess, we were introduced to the committee members, to the team.

I was stung to the quick. Someone asked me what I was doing dressed in green and what my job was. The comment made by the person following my answer implied that I was probably a “spin doctor”. Since I don't have a French equivalent for that term, I will use the somewhat vaguer term of “bureaucrat”.

Since I had my mouth full and I am polite, I did not reply immediately. But here I am this morning. I'm a full-fledged member of the Canadian Armed Forces, I am proud of that, and I am proud of my uniform, even though it is not always easy. As you can see, there are a lot of blue uniforms around here.

I have a wife and two young boys. My situation is the same as that of many others you have heard from since the beginning of your travels across Canada. I only have been in the Canadian Forces for four years, but I have already moved three times. You heard from Major Desgagnés this morning. So it is a tight race; I may catch up to him some day.

That is not a problem for me. I have already been to Haiti for five months. Some people here have probably had two, three, four or even more missions of this type. I have had other shorter deployments here and there, a recovery operation, about three weeks ago, an a deployment in the Montreal region. You get a phone call on a Sunday afternoon and find out that you are going to such and such a place. We often work day and night, for 12, 14 or 15 hours. There are other United Nations and NATO missions that I will be doing in the very near future. Last January, less than a month ago, I got a call asking if I would volunteer for a mission to Bosnia. I have been back from Haiti for five months, but that doesn't matter.

I am heading off to Norway very soon. That is no problem. There are many operators here who are going to Norway. It's all part of the game.

• 1100

I am on duty 24 hours a day. As a bureaucrat or “spin doctor” I work beyond the 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. schedule. I get calls day and night. That is the nature of my job. I answer them. That is not a problem.

Mr. Chairman, committee members, I feel perfectly comfortable in my profession and in my uniform, the uniform of the CF. The current philosophy within the CF is that if you are not deployable, you are not employable.

So I am a “spin doctor”, perhaps a bureaucrat, but first of all a member of the CF. I don't know many bureaucrats who are sent abroad for six months, who leave their families, their young children behind, who make sacrifices, who move year after year. I don't know of many bureaucrats who do that.

The members of the Canadian Forces, despite a 12% salary gap, at least in the case of officers, are dedicated people. Today, there is a 12% salary gap between my salary and that of senior public servants whose job is similar to mine. The difference is that they never have to go to Haiti or Bosnia.

In the ranks, the salary gap is almost 2%. There's always a difference. Why is there this salary gap in light of all the sacrifices we have to make?

That was just my introduction. The issue I want to deal with today...

Some honourable members: Oh, oh!

Cpt Luc Gaudet: ... deals with the unfair rules, or what is otherwise known as grievances in military jargon. I am relatively new to the organization. As you know, I have been a member of the Forces for only four years. I took my basic training, I climbed through the normal levels in the normal way. I got to where I am, and, according to the plan, I was supposed to be promoted to my current rank in January 1997, a little more than one year ago.

I don't know whether everyone recalls what the situation was like last year at the same time, around Christmas 1996. There were two stories, among others, in the media at that time: the Perron case in Gagetown, and the matter involving a high ranking officer in the Canadian Forces. These involved allegations of fraud. That was in December 1996, and these stories made the national headlines. At the time, the department made a decision that had a tremendous impact on the career path of the young officers. The department simply declared that there would be a moratorium on officer promotions. Thus, in the vast majority of cases, the officers affected were junior officers, second lieutenants, lieutenants, people earning $30,000 and less, people with children, with families. That was the decision made by the department at the time.

No problem, I swallowed my medicine, knowing very well that this moratorium would only affect lieutenants and sub-lieutenants. We were told at the time, to help us to accept this, that there would probably be no problem when the moratorium is over—we never knew when that would be—and we would get retroactive promotions, with the fringe benefits that went with them. I swallowed my medicine. No problem.

All this had been announced on December 31, 1996. So this was kind of hard to swallow for a lieutenant. In January when I came back to work, I was told: “You're going to Haiti; in March you're leaving for Valcartier, for one month. You're going on a U.N. mission to Haiti.” No problem, I accepted that. It's part of my job.

If I'm here this morning, it is not in order to complain about deployments or difficulties for my family. Yes, such conditions do exist, obviously, but no one forced me to go to the recruitment centre. I did this voluntarily and I accept the consequences. That was my choice. In a certain way, I am imposing it on my family, and my family has to live with that. That's not where the problem lies.

• 1105

So, I went to Haiti, I did my work there and, three months after the beginning of the department's moratorium, which had begun in January 1997, I was given my promotion. At the end of April, at the Maple Leaf Camp, the temperature was 40 degrees. I was happy, but that's as far as it went. I did not get my retroactive pay nor the fringe benefits that went with it. And we're talking about a large sum of money. The promotion from lieutenant to captain is one of the most important promotions in rank, because you are considered someone with experience, but there are also fringe benefits that come with all that. In wages, it is a great leap forward.

So, I didn't get three months of captain's salary, with the fringe benefits, etc. For me this is a net loss. I have to fight the system. Presently, my grievance is pending. It is already at a higher level. Over the last seven months, it has been supported from the bottom up without any problem. My case is clear cut, black and white; it's one of the most clear cut and the most obvious cases, one of the easiest ones to settle. Imagine a complicated situation, involving for example a corporal. My case is clear. After almost seven months, I am still waiting for a decision, I am still waiting for some notice telling me that I might have an answer within two months.

I am conscious of the fact that enormous cuts were made over the last years at headquarters. Our CDS, our DCDS, our VCDS have other problems to deal with than petty grievances, or small redresses of injustice done to junior officers. First of all, operations are primordial, I am aware of that, but I think that after seven months of waiting, I have a right to expect an answer. Obviously, I am expecting a positive answer. But that's not the question. I am waiting for a settlement of that request. Obviously there is a lot of red tape in Ottawa.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. Just now, an intervenor spoke about other subjects that do not concern my case. He came to see me, knowing that I was about to intervene, and asked me whether, on his behalf, I could ask you to hear him out once again. He had forgotten to raise a point. I'm conscious of our time limit, but I am asking you on his behalf, whether you will hear him.

A voice: A quick question without any answer.

The Chairman: We can sign him up at the end of the list, but I do not think we will have the time to hear him, because there are several others and time is going by fast.

Capt Luc Gaudet: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman: Thank you. Are there any questions for the Captain? None? Thank you very much, Captain.

Capt Luc Gaudet: Thank you.

The Chairman: Ms. Nadine Parisé.

Ms. Nadine Parisé (Individual Presentation): Good morning. I will try to be brief. I will speak on several points and then, if there are any questions, I will answer them.

The $30 which are taken away each month from the meagre wages of the military, the so-called “mess due”, could at least be allowable as union expenses so that we could deduct them from our income tax return. We have no choice. These $30 are simply withdrawn from the pay of each military person even if the military do not always take advantage of the mess because very often, they don't have time to go there because they have too much work.

If bilingualism is a hiring criterion, how is it francophones are the only ones, just about, who are able to master both languages?

Voices: Hear, hear!

Ms. Nadine Parisé: They are not making a cent more, but they can speak two languages.

By the way, dealing with services for married couples, those who complain of the absence of English language services in Quebec should see what it's like being a francophone and moving into an anglophone province.

For instance, during the ice storm crisis, in Montreal, many workers had to be exiled to go and help out elsewhere. They were separated from their families, but at least they got some financial benefits from this. I am talking about employees of Hydro Québec, for example, and of Bell Canada and of many others. My friend left for two weeks and he did not get a cent for that. All we got for that was trouble, because he was gone and we had to pay more baby- sitters, because I also have a life to live apart from all that.

• 1110

As far as we are concerned, we are not getting anything at all out of this; we are merely paying.

And regarding psychological support for the families of military personnel on United Nations missions, it is practically non-existent. During a four-month mission that my spouse was on last year, I only received one phone call lasting less than a minute from one social worker. How can they make sure family equilibrium is being maintained during such a long separation without even taking the time to go out and meet people at home? There is no psychological support, or practically none.

The army does not seem to have evolved at the same speed as society at large. Nowadays, wives of military personnel also have careers and they cannot constantly be dragged from one end of the country to the other without ever saying anything. With the meagre wages that the military get, a second salary is, for many, a necessity. Fathers are no longer vague entities who bring home the bacon, and this has been the case for a long time. They are and they want to be present in their children's lives. Military personnel and their families are human beings, but some seem to have forgotten that. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much. There are no questions?

Mr. Denis Lavoie.

Chief Denis Lavoie (Individual Presentation): Good day to all. Why are housing allowances in isolated or expensive places such as Esquimalt, Ottawa and Trenton directly proportional to rank? I'll explain what I mean.

According to CFAO 205-30, the higher a person's rank, the more help they get. That isn't right; the soldier is the one who needs it the most. Besides you can see that in your documents here. Out West, they have to go and get food every week. They cannot live otherwise, for them this is a matter of survival. Soldiers are the ones who need this money, and not higher ranking officers. I have nothing against the higher ranking officers, but the soldiers are the ones who need it.

Major Desgagnés said that he was losing a lot of pilots. We are losing technicians. We are losing them almost at the same rate as they are, and for the same reason: we don't have the same salaries as civilians. The Captain spoke earlier about the disparity between officers and the public service and the disparity between us and the public service. He said it went from 2 to 12%. As aviation technicians, I will tell you honestly that when we leave we get a $10,000 increase. That is quite clear. Almost everyone here in this room has 20 years service and we will leave with a pension of about $17,000 gross and a $10,000 increase. Therefore, if you want to keep your people, you have to pay them. That is what that means. That's all I wanted to say. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Mr. Pierre Hébert.

Corporal Pierre Hébert (Individual Presentation): Mr. Chairman, committee members, welcome. As you can see, I am a member of the military, but I am not wearing my uniform because I no longer have the same sense of belonging that I did 12 or 15 years ago.

I am delighted that a committee such as yours has been established to remove the secrecy surrounding certain taboo subjects. However, the budget and time allocated are limited. And we are talking about subjects which would require far lengthier and more in-depth discussion.

In CFP 300, which is a big organization, the human factor is identified as being the most important one here. It is time that a committee be set up, as was done in one of the western provinces, made up of the rank and file and completely independent of the system, so as to discuss and resolve these problems.

• 1115

In one of the provinces, child care services are being reformed. They took the folk working in that area to change the government's pyramid structure. It is those people who are responsible for decision-making and who will submit a business plan, a plan which will be stronger and more valuable for the people concerned because they are the ones who built it.

They are the people who will have a sense of belonging. It's like a mission. When you are on a mission, if you carry it out yourself, you have something binding you to it. But if somebody else imposes it on you, you no longer have that bond. Therefore, it is time to sit down, identify committees which could work on those issues and devote the time needed to them.

As you can see, there are a lot of frustrated people, and if we are to address their frustrations, we should not be debating them at your level but rather at our level, and we should begin to set up committees to discuss those subjects.

As I told you this morning, it requires some courage to come here and talk about this. I would be curious to know how many corporals have come so far to talk to you. We have seen two this morning. They are former soldiers and are now retired. They have come here because they have experienced frustration in the past. Now they are able to prove what they are saying or get their point across. However, in our system, some people feel they are being attacked. And there is an enormous amount of fear because of the difference in ranks. There is also an oppression factor; you could almost call that oppression. People won't come here and say what they think because they are afraid it might hurt their career. There are other factors related to that, such as the family for example.

Therefore, I believe it would be very important to set up a committee whose members would all be independent of the military system.

People also talked about the handling of grievances, promotions and performance appraisal systems. That should also be completely independent of the system, because grievances or cases of unfairness are still handled within the system. They should be assessed by an outside body, which could take into consideration the points raised or cases of unfairness.

That would take far less time, and the results would probably be much fairer than is currently the case.

As regards grievances, as the Captain pointed out, if the officer in charge doesn't have time to go over the appraisals or consider them more carefully because he has other things to do, as I can well understand, then he gives that responsibility to someone else.

There is a system of protection in the public service. In our case, we are told that we are protected through the grievance handling system. I don't believe that myself. It is very difficult to change that.

Therefore, we need an independent committee to protect our rights. I'm not talking here about the immediate superior, but about an independent committee.

We have a host of very specific internal regulations. It all comes down to the handling of grievances and the performance appraisal system. That is internal, and we have to get away from that.

Reference was made earlier to career managers. The best career manager is you yourself. If you have family problems, whatever the reason may be, you should be able to talk about them, but not to your supervisor because, particularly at the level of a corporal, you have no direct contact with the career manager, except once or twice a year. You have a chance to see him when you are not deployed elsewhere.

We need a career manager authorized to represent us, and we should be able to communicate directly with him and not through our immediate supervisor, because that is where the problem is, if you mention to him that you have a problem, that will go on higher. By the time the problem gets to Ottawa, it has been completely distorted.

People also talk about the well-known subject of pensions. There should be a major reform here; I will not dwell on that point, because the problem has been very clearly described.

• 1120

When you leave the Forces after 20 year's service, you receive only $1,000 a month. I would not want to criticize those people on welfare, because they are in an unfortunate situation. However, those people have the same income as I do, and I have given 20 years service to my country.

I believe that the salary is important, but values are more important: leadership, loyalty, honour. We can only resolve these problems by talking to one another, communicating, having trust and a good personnel management system.

As I mentioned, there are too many people in supervisory positions. They have a staff of 20 or 30 that have never taken appropriate courses to learn how to manage the staff they have to supervise.

Mention was also made of the problems faced by families who are transferred, particularly when they have young children. I believe that particular attention should be given to those people.

Statistics show that when children are not well looked after and disturbed during the first and second years of their education, they will have problems in 10, 15 or 20 years. This is true of a large percentage of dropouts. I saw the problem myself; I lived in the West for five years. My oldest child was beginning grade one.

I had four years left in my career, and I had to fight to assert my right to send my child to a francophone school. But there were no francophone schools where I was. Even within our system, it is written in black and white that you have that right. If that is part of the system, why should you have to fight?

When you are dealing with the system, you are always part of it and you always have to fight. It is very important to have another committee, a third committee, which would be external so as to ensure our rights are respected.

There is also the question of recognition of the skills we have acquired. I have received training, but if I spend 20 years in the army and then join the job market, what I have done as a member of the military is not recognized. This is a major problem. This means that when I leave, I will not find a job and my wife will probably have to assume our financial responsibilities because my training is not recognized outside the Forces. There should be something systematic to ensure recognition of the training given to members of the Canadian Forces. I know that some work is being done but this does not apply to every trade. Some trades have not been affected.

There is also the problem of the place of residence. This is a very serious problem. I've come back here twice. I went outside Quebec and I have come back. For example, if I want a hunting and fishing license, I am not recognized as a resident the day I arrive in Quebec. This is quite new, and I learned that I was not recognized as a resident. To have a license, I would have to pay 10 to 15 times as much as a resident. You must have been a resident for six months. However, you have to pay taxes from the day you arrive. Try and find the mistake there!

Now, let's talk about our colleagues in the public service. My colleague sitting next to me earns 10%, not 2%, more than I do. They don't have to move. They are not affected. They are there for a certain time, 20, 30 or 35 years. In our case, it has been shown that after four moves, your furniture is ruined; it's as if I had been in a fire.

When they proposed the early retirement programs, we were offered the lowest amount. They got far more.

• 1125

However, we have to accept transfers and the responsibilities that come with them. We have to move. They can stay where they are. This is a serious disadvantage to our job.

Another important point was addressed, namely the pooling of the Forces and G3 03. We are told that once you become a G3 03, you are kicked out in accordance with the principle of pooling. I agree with that, because the principle is good, but it should be applied across the board in the province, regardless of rank.

Let me explain. I myself am a designer, a 611. Because of the restructuring, I became a 649 and, in my new trade, a G2 02. Therefore, I am a victim of the system because when I was previously a G3 03 I met the standards of my trade. Now if I have become a G2 02, as required under the system, and I may perhaps receive a letter telling me: "You are being let go; you are a G3 03 and because of the pooling of the Forces we have to put you on the scrap heap."

However, my supervisors in the world of engineering are 648s and are allowed to keep their G3 03 medical status. If you are deployed to an operational theatre would you have to stop running because you are G3 03? So this regulation should be applied all across the province regardless of rank.

I'd like to write a book about everything I experienced because it would probably be quite similar to what was stated here, but I might perhaps end up behind bars. Therefore, maybe I'll wait until I retire. As I stated, in order to address the situation described here today we would need an independent committee where the majority of members would be made up of people working at the ground floor level, that is people like us who could study situations and correct them if necessary. Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Corporal Charles Baril.

Corporal Charles Baril (Individual Presentation): Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. First of all, I would like to know whether there will soon be an ombudsman for the Canadian Armed Forces. Right now, we cannot make any complaints about problems, waste, or poor administration in the Canadian Armed Forces without having the complaint go to our superiors. In other words, we do not have the right to talk about the errors that are made. But if we had an ombudsman, we could talk about these things.

In one instance, I saw how money was being wasted. A desk was bought for a chief warrant officer in my wing. The desk cost over $2,000, because there was a budget surplus. We could have used that money to buy tools, or anything, but the budget surplus was wasted. Everybody saw what happened, but no one could say anything because we did not have the right to speak out. There was no one to tell that this money had been wasted. I would really like an answer, please.

The Chairman: I hope you understand that I cannot give you an answer on this immediately. If I understand correctly, you have a recommendation to make to us.

Cpl Charles Baril: Yes, indeed I do. This is something we really need, as long as there isn't someone independent of the Army to whom we can take our complaints... Everyone said that we have to reduce our expenses and prevent waste, but we can't talk about actual cases of waste or needless spending because we are afraid of reprisals, because the people in authority want that money spent. So who could we talk to without fear of reprisals? We are at the mercy of our superiors.

I don't want to complain about my superiors in any way, that is not what I'm doing. But when we see an example of what we consider wasteful spending, we should be able to put it before someone independent of the Forces, who would form an independent opinion. I recommend that there be such a person.

This man who went to the Gulf war gave his life, in the end. He is similar to many Canadian Forces members. These are people who believe in the system, who believe that Canada is one of the most democratic countries in the world, and that we are there not just to collect a pay cheque, not just because we are technicians or administrators, but to defend the country we believe in.

• 1130

That is really why we joined up. Perhaps it was not our initial reason, but it came later, once we understood how necessary we really are. It is we, the members of the Canadian Armed Forces, who defend this country's democratic system, and make it possible for everyone to sleep soundly every night. We are here to defend them, and to ensure their safety.

But look how we are treated. This man went to the Gulf war. His life was wasted, and no one will even acknowledge that. Take Mr. Boudreau, a former member of the Royal 22nd Regiment. His back gave out during exercises. He did not go to war, but that doesn't matter. The exercise did his back in. When something like this happens to you, whether it's your back or something else, they just don't care, even if you could get well. These people are used, and when they have done their time or are medically unfit, they're just put on the scrap heap.

If I were a soldier in Hitler's army or in Saddam Hussein's army, I would not be surprised if my life was considered unimportant, if I was pushed aside, or if I was treated like cannon fodder. Unfortunately, some of that goes on here in Canada. Our contribution is not respected and not recognized, we are just used. You give the best 20 years of your life, and then that's it. No one cares what you do after that, you are just out. You have been used. If we were civilians, we would not be devoting the best 20 years of our lives to defending our country. Most people here are saying: “we're going to war, we're going to war.” There is certainly a reason for going to war.

The soldiers who went to the Gulf war believed in what they were doing. They believed they were defending Canada. So if Canada decided to participate in the Gulf war, that was all right. So most of them went because they wanted to go, and volunteered to go.

At the end of the day, you are used and cast aside. Ms. Dion was saying this morning that people were worried about losing their jobs. That worry is not difficult to understand: in the early 1970s and late 1960s, it wasn't hard to spend 20 years in the Army and then find a job as a civilian. You did not need a college diploma or university degree to find a job. If you had military qualifications, you could find a job. Just try it today. Try to find a job that pays a decent salary without a cegep diploma or university degree. I'm not talking about pumping gas part-time in an Esso or Petro Canada station. I'm talking about a job with decent pay.

Members of the armed forces are worried about losing their jobs because after 20 years you are just cast aside. They don't care about you.

They are worried about not making enough money to support their families, or to meet their financial obligations. They have to pay for their house, or for their car. People are worried about these things.

Let me add something else on the subject of qualifications. Right now, all jobs with value, or with the greatest value, I should say, are going to the private sector. Skilled jobs in electronics are being given to civilians because they say these jobs are not deployable. They may not be deployable, but if you want to work as a civilian when you leave the army, you need a job like that. Pumping gas for an F-18—not that I have anything against it, I've done it myself—or changing tires isn't going to get you a job as a civilian. You need a skilled job in the Forces if you want to do something decent when you get out.

I work in the module shop of the AMS3. Now, only five or six people with more than four years' experience are left. Air Canada got the best people there. Why? Because Air Canada is paying them more. So they left because they were offered a higher salary. And there is another advantage. You don't have to leave Air Canada after 20 years. You can stay with them for 50 years or 55 years. But in the Forces you can't do that. When it's time to go, you're gone.

At one point, they were thinking of contracting out these jobs to the private sector. But if we didn't have the qualifications to work there, to reassemble these engines, what would we have left? We need these qualifications to work in a company like Air Canada. So if we don't have these shops, which are stable, it becomes much much more difficult to find a job outside. They wanted four years' experience in engine assembling. Once you have that experience, you can go to Air Canada or to a similar company. But if you don't have those four years, what do you do? You twiddle your thumbs, or make do on a pension of $16,000 or $17,000 a year, or pump gas.

It's time to stop tightening our belts and scrimp on every penny. The Forces should have a proper system, and be self- sufficient without interference from civilians. Some things may not be deployable, but they are necessary, if only for the well-being of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Thank you, that is all I have to say.

• 1135

The Chairman: Corporal, I believe Mr. Benoit has a question for you.

[English]

Mr. Leon Benoit: Actually, Corporal, I don't really have a question; I just want to say that I really appreciate your comments. We've heard the need for an independent ombudsman expressed before, and I think it's pretty clear that there is a need for something like that.

Cpl Charles Baril: So you have been studying it in Parliament?

Mr. Leon Benoit: Well, that is being considered. It's a recommendation that's been made, but I don't think the position that is being talked about is going to do what you want it to do. So that is an important point that you've brought up.

In terms of morale, I think you expressed very well that it's not only pay that affects morale; it's being able to feel that you're really valued for the work that you do and for the commitment you make and for the sacrifices you make. I think you put it very well. If you're not valued when you're making the kinds of sacrifices that you're making, then of course you won't have good morale.

So I just thank you for your comments.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Thank you. Ms. Valerie Morinville.

[English]

Ms. Valerie Morinville (Individual Presentation): I'd like to make a couple of points, and I will make them brief.

Last night and again this morning there have been a few comments about the military doing their own public relations. The only question I have about that is that if you work for a big company, if you're one department in that company you're not expected to do your own public relations. It is the overall company that takes care of you. I think that, yes, the Canadian Forces have a step to go there. I think that they do have to take responsibility for part of that, but the federal government also has a responsibility to support them.

Last night and again this morning Mr. Benoit asked questions about whether shorter, more frequent deployments would be a solution to having people go away for six and nine months. I've been through both, and, no, I don't think this is the answer.

Our children grieve every time our spouses leave. I think that perhaps shorter but perhaps not more frequent deployments might be the answer. Yes, they joined the military, and yes, it is part of their position in the military and it is expected, but I think other things can be done to help alleviate some of that.

One of the things that maybe can be done to help that is to educate the people who deal with the spouses and the families, the teachers and the social workers in the area. Often they have no idea of what kind of life a military person or their spouse and family have.

Our multi-services centre here on the base did make such a program, and I was lucky enough to be asked to participate in the first session when they gave the formation to some social services in the area. Unfortunately, I haven't seen anything done with that since then and I don't know whether it is or not, but I have to question whether again that comes down to a problem of money.

Last year a teacher with 28 years of experience who has worked always on this base and now works in town with military children and civilians told me that military children have more problems, cause more problems than civilians. Our children are discriminated against. They are seen as rabble-rousers and trouble-makers. They're seen as lazy. It's simply, I think, a question of the teachers not being aware that dad or mom has left the family for six months. Even if it's a week—as I said, each time they leave, the family grieves.

• 1140

The last point I would like to address concerns postings and how they are affected by the government budget cuts.

My husband is currently awaiting word on whether or not we are being posted this summer. This has been going on for a month now. Each day he comes home and he has no news for me. It has put our lives completely upside down.

The reason they can't make a decision on whether or not this posting will happen is that there is no money for the posting. But if money is not found for this posting, whether it's for my husband or for somebody else, the Canadian Air Force will not have a fire marshal this year; and that's not the only position that needs to be filled and that will not be filled because of money or the lack of it.

Because of not knowing whether or not we are being posted this summer, our family can't make plans. We can't make plans for summer vacation. We can't make plans for Easter vacation, because my husband could be posted next month.

I am six classes away from finishing my bachelor's degree, and because of my husband's postings I have done all of it by correspondence. I don't know whether or not I should take a class this summer, because I don't know whether or not I'm moving.

We have to be very careful what we say and what we don't say in front of our children. We have three children, and we don't want to upset them unduly about a move that might not happen. They went through that in September of this year, when we were told we were posted to Ottawa and then one week later the posting was cancelled.

This will be the fourth posting we have faced in five years. Each time it has been a matter of months when they tell us we are being posted, we are not being posted; no, I'm sorry, you can't go there; no, you can go here. A lot of those difficulties are for financial reasons. I believe this can be avoided, along with the stress our family endures, and every family endures, each time.

Postings make it difficult at best for spouses to have a meaningful career. As Lieutenant-Colonel Desgroseilliers commented last night, there comes a time when a spouse has to have his or her turn. It becomes increasingly difficult for me to support my husband in his military career, a career that causes undue stress on our family as we wait for decisions to be made because there is no money. With the support of the federal government, both financial and otherwise, I think some of these problems could be, if not avoided, at least alleviated.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Corporal Daniel Bisson.

Corporal Daniel Bisson (Individual Presentation): Good morning Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I am Corporal Bisson, an electronic technician. In approximately two months, I will have 17 years of service. I would like to raise a number of points that could be changed in the future.

The first deals with our health care plan. According to Directive AFN-100-002-AG 005, our health care coverage stops when we leave the Forces, contrary to GSMIP, which we can keep. It would be desirable to be able to maintain health care coverage, even if there are some fees to pay, because we can leave when we are 37 years old, with 20 years of service, and still need dental care.

The second deals with the unfairness of the pay system for officers and non-officers. There are 10 incentive measures available to officers and only four for non-officers. In the military system today there are frequently corporals and master corporals with 20 years of service with only four incentives, and this doesn't get you very far.

• 1145

My third and final point deals with pensions.

When we leave the Forces at age 37 with 20 years of service, our pensions are not indexed. I would like that pensions be indexed, first, because they are not very high and, second, because it is very difficult to find a job at 37. There is very little call for our various trades in civilian life. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Mr. Jacques Gauthier.

Major Jacques Gauthier (Individual Presentation): Members of the committee, ladies, gentlemen, I am Major Gauthier and I am the Base Telecommunications Officer at Bagotville. I have 28 years of service, soon to be 29. I would like to raise a few points and make a few suggestions. I have a reputation for adding my two bits at the last minute.

In the Canadian Armed Forces, morale is dropping. Many people are sticking their heads in the sand, like an ostrich, and refusing to come out. I have a sufficiently high rank. Therefore, for me the problem is one of helping our personnel. It is my job to solve problems.

Our members are told every day, every week, that there will be cuts, there won't be cuts, we want more money, or we have less money. This is affecting the troops' morale. It is important that the hierarchy and the federal government make some decisions in order to create stability for at least five to ten years. In other words, decide what is going to happen and decide it once and for all so that there can be some stability and we can at least give our members a sense of belonging and raise their morale.

I don't know if you are aware that for some time a lot of people have been leaving the Canadian Armed Forces because of the instability, even though civilian life is not much more stable. As soon as they have an opportunity, they leave. I am losing on average 3 out of 40 each year. This is not a huge number, but it is a lot more than I am used to losing. The stress level is rising rapidly and, in some cases, even to the point of suicide.

Therefore, it is important to establish stability. If there has to be cuts in the Canadian Forces at some level, let's say it and do it all at once; let's solve the issue. Then we can have stability and begin to rebuild things. At the beginning, we had 72,000 members; this dropped to 65,000, and then to 62,000, and now we are at 60,000. We don't know what is happening. Let's make a decision and stabilize things, and give our people a chance to start again and truly belong to the CAF and to regain their pride.

I am not speaking primarily for my own sake. I am speaking of what I see and of what is happening among my employees in the CAF. This is my suggestion.

Let's now talk about federal taxes. When someone from Ontario moves to Quebec, it costs $2,000 more in taxes, at one fell swoop. The same person moving to Alberta would receive a bonus. We are Canadians working for Canada. Why does Canada not recognize the need for a uniform level of taxes for its employees who are constantly moving in Canada and throughout the world?

This brings us to licence plates for federal vehicles. Since the territory of the bases where they are posted is subject to federal jurisdiction, the problem does not really affect CAF members. The spouse and children have problems with medical coverage. The problem must be discussed with the provinces and it will be difficult, especially with Quebec.

The spouses lose their jobs each time we move. There are some simple solutions, but they will not be adopted by the towns where the bases are located. Since we have to move, let's give our spouses employment on CF bases. Spouses should receive priority for employment.

• 1150

Certain CF members lose their jobs because they fail to meet the minimum standard, which is to be able to carry a 50-pound back pack. When your knees have gone... The person who spoke previously worked for me at the end, because he had been transferred to our section a few months before his release. He was a very good technician, who was still capable of good service and good work. Why are such people not offered civilian employment in the Canadian Armed Forces? When we are deployed, we will need this experience to maintain the base. If people are very qualified, as this person was, why not employ them in positions that are not subject to deployment, once they become civilian members. Their experience could be useful on the base; they have already served in the military and understand the system, and would be an asset at a CF base. This is all I have to say. Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

[English]

Mr. Pratt.

Mr. David Pratt: Major, we've obviously heard about a lot of problems in terms of the situation faced with respect to pay, with respect to spousal employment, with respect to morale. We've covered many issues here over the last day or so. I'm wondering how you would characterize the situation that is being faced, looking at it from a general standpoint. Would you say that it's a serious situation or would you say that it's reached crisis proportions within the Canadian Forces?

Maj Jacques Gauthier: This is simply my opinion, not anybody else's, and I'm not talking politics. I'm just looking around, and after 29 years of service I've been around. I've seen a lot of people who used to be very happy and who worked very well break down like I've never seen before. To me, it's reaching a crisis point.

I'm not an expert. I'm only looking around. I'm watching.

To me, it's less at the officers level, because we're used to troubleshooting all the time and to always looking at problems and trying to solve them. But at the other ranks, especially when they have to face financial crises in Toronto, Victoria and places like that, where we have a hike in taxes when we move there.... A corporal or a master corporal who makes low wages cannot meet expenses unless his wife can work, and yet she's moved there and she speaks French so she'll have a heck of a time finding a job.

The same happens here. Here, if you have a 677 number, no matter if you're French or English, they won't tell you you won't get the job, but you're not going to get the job. That's guaranteed.

The problems that the finances cause.... Some people here thought that money is not the answer. Money is the answer in places where it becomes a heavy burden, such as the places I mentioned: taxes where it's unequal, where we have to change our plates all the time, where we have to change medical systems all the time. It's added pressure that's not required, especially for the lower ranks.

We have to do something to stabilize the system. Stability is the key to morale. It's also key to having people that are going to serve Canada.

I joined Canada because I believe in it and because I think I can make a difference. I think most of us do, especially after five years. The first five years, most people will join just to learn the trade. After that, when you get caught into it and you start seeing the people around, you start understanding Canada better, and then you become a real Canadian—most of the time, anyway.

So what I'm trying to say is that we need stability. There are ways to achieve stability. I'm not in the headquarters in Ottawa and I don't say I know all the problems. The thing is, we change leadership a lot. That's not to say the leadership is bad; it's just that everybody's got new ideas. Every time you change people, it's always changing.

We cannot compare Canada's forces with Australian forces, even though they're about the same size. They don't do the UN peacekeeping we do. They don't have the taxes we pay. They don't have the vast territory we cover. They don't have the UN, NATO commitment that we have, and the U.S. commitment that we have.

The U.S. is telling us that we are not a viable force any more. We're a joke. We're not a force that can even ensure sovereignty right now. That's my belief. If we want to ensure our own sovereignty, meet our requirements with the U.S., which we're starting to really lack in, and with NATO, to which we have reduced our commitment by half....

• 1155

People say, well, NATO is a waste of money. NATO ensures we don't have the necessity to have 200,000 soldiers on this land to defend it, because we have a community of other soldiers to help us.

We contribute to the UN because we believe in peace, and we're very much involved in it. Our people are gone, especially in the army, every 18 months, which is ridiculous. Divorces.... Families cannot exist. They need stability.

What you need, then, is to increase the size of the army, increase the size of the air force, not reduce it to a laughing stock, which is what is happening right now.

This is my personal view. It's not a military view. It's from a study of political science, maybe, and what has been happening lately. To me, we're going into disarray.

We need to stop the bleeding. We need to say where we're going to cut, where we're going to go. We need to be direct with it, not underhanded, not changing our minds every five minutes.

It's ridiculous. You're going to have more problems and stress. People are going to fall apart. You're going to have a lot of lives that are going to be destroyed. We're destroying them at a faster pace than ever before, as far as I'm concerned.

[Translation]

The Chairman: One moment, Major. Ms. Venne would like to ask you a question.

Maj Jacques Gauthier: I thought you wanted to proceed very quickly.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: As you have noted, we are asking fewer and fewer questions, because we want to hear as many people as possible. Nevertheless, I couldn't stop myself from saying that some of the solutions that you have proposed deal with matters of exclusive provincial jurisdiction, for example, we would be meddling in an area of provincial jurisdiction if we were to unilaterally change licence plates, as you have proposed.

You also mentioned taxes, education and health. As you know, these are fields of provincial jurisdiction. So, unfortunately, I do not think that your solutions can be adopted, unless we enter into discussions with all the Canadian provinces, and that would be a rather lengthy process.

As for your previous suggestion, which has already been made, this would be a relocation allowance. It already exists, but only for housing. In this case, it would have to be proportional. For example, in Victoria, we know very well, since we went there, that not only rent, but also gasoline and even food and other things are more expensive. Maybe there should be a proposal in this regard.

Maj Jacques Gauthier: Yes. As I have said, CF bases are areas of federal jurisdiction in all provinces. Licences should not pose a problem. The problem is with medicare. Because of the taxes, if the federal government were responsible, the provinces would say that they are not funded for this and therefore should not be obliged to provide medicare to our children and wives. The only way to do it would be to compensate the province for military personnel.

We are told that this is impossible. Nothing is impossible. The discussions may take a long time, but if it is properly done and well organized, it can happen. Someone will have to think about the Canadian Armed Forces and about the sacrifices its members make, and take the time to try to do it. It should be done publicly so that the Canadian public gets a better understanding of what the Canadian Forces do. That might make it easier to get the message across. It should be consistent so that everyone is treated fairly.

As I have said, a difference of $2,000 per year, especially when you first arrive in the province, that hurts anybody. It helps a lot to be transferred to Alberta, because there are no provincial taxes, but there are few postings in Alberta. When you move to Quebec, that costs more than $2,000 in taxes. Moving to Newfoundland is also more expensive than to Ontario. These things have to be examined in order to provide stability and so that we are treated a little more like everybody else.

I am more worried about my corporals, sergeants and pilots than I am about myself, because I have a better salary. We have to look after our people. We have to provide some stability. This is what I wanted to say to you. Thank you.

Ms. Pierrette Venne: Thank you.

The Chairman: Ladies and gentlemen, unfortunately, I must end our deliberations this morning. I would like to apologize to Mrs. Catherine Fulton De Pape, Ms. Sonya Chisolm-Dubé, Mr. Robert Boudreau, who wanted to appear a second time, and Mr. Bill Neelin.

• 1200

If these people have a written brief I would urge them to send it to the clerk in Ottawa or to give it to him this morning.

Once again, my apologies. I would really like to thank you for being here this morning. My colleagues and I have greatly appreciated your comments and suggestions.

I would also like to tell you that your ideas will be very important when we come to writing our report. Thank you, once again.

The meeting is adjourned.