Interventions in Committee
 
 
 
RSS feed based on search criteria Export search results - CSV (plain text) Export search results - XML
Add search criteria
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-31 12:53
Expand
Mr. Jarmyn, in response to what Mr. Vandal was asking, you said that it's the statute. I don't want to put you in an uncomfortable position, but could you share with us what you think should be changed in the statute that directs your body?
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-19 11:30
Expand
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Leonardo, it's a pleasure to meet you. I have read many of your articles and heard a lot about you.
You talked about the fact that there are two classes of veterans. Could you please explain what you meant when you say that?
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-19 11:32
Expand
Mr. Leonardo, I understand you made a series of surveys and you had a series of answers.
According to the law, I am a veteran myself. I was released from the army a few months ago, and three days ago I received a letter from VAC informing me of my rights and telling me they want to meet me in Quebec City—that's where I'm living—to inform me of the benefits and whatever I can receive.
I think that's a new approach. Have any of your recent members spoken to you about that? I mean, is this working? Do you think it's good?
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-19 11:33
Expand
Seriously, I have a doubt about that. Maybe there is a reason.
Mr. Black, throughout your testimony I found your analysis overall to be positive toward the benefits and services given by VAC.
First of all, thank you for being here. You're the first second-generation veteran we have received before this new committee since the last election, and it's the first time I have heard something positive concerning VAC. How do you explain this gap between your experience and the experience of your mates of your generation and what the Afghanistan veterans of modern warfare and of the nineties have experienced?
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-19 11:34
Expand
Yes. It seems apparent that it's better to be under the old system.
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-19 11:35
Expand
Why do you think they changed the system in 2005, in December, when the charter came about? What were the problems that they tried to answer with the new charter?
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-12 12:28
Expand
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us today. I am very grateful.
I know every time the fact that you have to repeat your story is extremely difficult, and we're fully aware of that.
As usual, I have dozens of questions. I had to choose the most important, or I think they are, and it's a brainstorm.
First, for Mr. Harris, this may be more a technical question. You say in your text that you want to save those who have fallen through the cracks. Could you share with us, if you know it, what the common issues or scenarios are of the members who you consider have fallen through the cracks? Is there a common theme?
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-12 12:31
Expand
Mr. Harris, you seem to be saying that's for the reservists. What about the cracks for the regulars?
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-12 12:32
Expand
Okay. I won't be quick myself. That's the problem.
Voices: Oh, oh!
The Chair: You have two minutes.
Mr. Alupa Clarke: Okay. I want to ask a question that's outside the box.
The new Veterans Charter is nothing but a new public policy, and public policy experts suggest that we wait five or 10 years before evaluating public policy. That's what we're doing right now and what the other committee was doing in its work. I think we can probably partly conclude that this public policy has a lot more failure than success.
The old system that was the invalidity pension was there to serve the financial needs, and I think it was quite simple. It worked. I might be wrong. The new Veterans Charter served two goals: to meet the financial needs of the veterans—so that was the same as the old pension—but also to meet the needs for the physical and mental problems, which was a new aspect in 2006.
To get to the outside-the-box question, should we just go back to the old system? Is this public policy just not good at all? Do we need to just go back to the invalidity pension?
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-10 12:34
Expand
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Madam Migneault and Madam Murray, thank you very much for being here.
I'm just brainstorming on my question, so I'll try to figure it out. For six months I've been thinking a lot about all the issues for veterans. Last week I think I started to understand something, and what you said today corresponds to this vision that came into my mind. You talked about stopping the circus, blowing it up, and starting from scratch, and then talking about the real issues.
What I've been seeing since the beginning is that there's the stakeholders group and there's the veterans. There are two things.
Also, in terms of what the ministry does, there are also two things, the financial benefits and the services. I think since the new charter of 2006, we are in a paradigm, which is to either create new benefits or increase existing benefits and allowances. That is good, and it had to be done, but it seems to me that this is kind of the circus, because even if it was done under the previous Conservative government—and I was wondering why, when we have all these new benefits, veterans still say we did nothing—I now see this new government following our path and just doing the easy stuff, which is to have new benefits and increase allowances.
I want to talk about the real issue, which might not be the real issue, but I'm trying to find out now.
Madam Murray, you talked about structural flaws in the ministry. I'm wondering if maybe it's not flaws but it's the structural culture of this ministry. I have a straightforward question, because veterans have been talking to me about this. Are you aware of non-official rules that the ministry is imposing on its case managers? I'll listen to you first, please, Madam Murray.
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-10 12:38
Expand
Structurally broke, or maybe structurally they want it to be that way also. That's what I want to find out, actually.
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-10 12:38
Expand
Yes.
Ms. Migneault, you said you are in part a result of the system as it relates to financial benefits, which are sometimes inadequate. As I said earlier, they are being increased, and that is the easy thing to do, I think.
You are also a result of the system in terms of the way this service is provided and the way you are treated by the department, for example.
I would like you to talk to me about how you are a result of the system and of the way your husband, as an individual, is treated by the department.
Collapse
View Alupa Clarke Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alupa Clarke Profile
2016-05-05 12:17
Expand
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Beaudin, given the situation, I am stunned to hear you say that the Department of Veterans Affairs is functioning very well.
Collapse
Results: 106 - 120 of 156 | Page: 8 of 11

|<
<
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
>
>|