Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 709
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
On page 17 of your report to the House, it says and I quote:
4.46 Overall, the approach in the current Act seeks to address the concerns raised in Osborne by creating a “fine balance” between the individual rights of employees and the public interest in imposing reasonable limitations on those rights in the name of a non-partisan public service.
It goes on to say:
4.47 Operationalizing that balance and the broader vision of a non-partisan public service reflected in the Preamble and Part 7 of the PSEA has been a priority for the PSC.
A bit further on, the report states:
4.51 There is always a tension between the non-partisanship of a professional public service and the need for a public service to respond effectively and loyally to the direction of elected officials. In the Westminster tradition, we expect a clear demarcation between the political and public service spheres. However, politicization of the public service has become a growing phenomenon in many countries in recent years.
Could you give the committee some concrete examples of that phenomenon within the federal public service?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
I would say we have seen numerous examples in the past year of people receiving patronage appointments after working for the government party. These people ended up in key positions. Is there anything to suggest that the political sphere is beginning to penetrate the public service, despite the fact that you have no authority to investigate whether the appointment was truly in the interest of the public service or merely to reward a political supporter. Should you have more power to criticize that state of affairs?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
What would you recommend to ensure that these appointments are based solely on merit and not partisan politics?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
I see that, among your requests or recommendations, you want to amend the legislation so that paid commissioners can also have other jobs. Does this talk of two jobs mean that commissioners are not paid very much and they have to find other work in order to make ends meet?
We are giving commissioners the opportunity to work for the commission and to work elsewhere at the same time. It seems to me that something is not quite right.
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
Do any retired people work as commissioners? If they work one day per month, they have to have income that comes from somewhere else. If the act currently prevents them from seeking income elsewhere, does it meant they are retired?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I am not questioning your integrity at all, Mr. Minister. Mr. Hillier said earlier that veterans' allowances had never been reduced. I think he is somewhat mistaken and I am going to show you why.
Do you recall the last time you appeared before this committee? I had asked the department to draw a comparison between the veterans charter and the former Pension Act. The department came to the conclusion that, in two out of three cases, it was more beneficial for those whose disability rates varied between 2%, 3%, 4% and 40% to be subject to the old Pension Act than the New Veterans Charter. It was not me who said that; it was your department. It is written in black and white in the report. I hope you are aware of that. And now, you have just told us that the new charter is better for the veterans you have met with and that it will protect them. That's not true. In the report, your department said that that the old pension was better for those whose rate of disability was less than 40%.
Mr. Chair, it has also been said that the waiting list has been reduced by 36% in a year, but the fact remains that 64% of claims have not been processed. In addition, the minister is asking us for $155.6 million to deal with the backlog of payments and disability pensions. Have you thought about the fact that 36% of applications have been processed, but people who were deployed in theatres of operation and came back injured have not been receiving any compensation? You have just started giving them benefits. You have just asked for new budgets. That makes no sense. Yet you talk about respect for veterans. Let me just say that we are nowhere near that.
In addition, we are talking about your tour. I am aware there was a tour because you came to my area. But if you have a tour to meet with veterans who are not going to benefit from the New Veterans Charter, we have a problem. What is the point of meeting with WW2 veterans who are receiving benefits under the Pension Act and have no link with the New Veterans Charter? Even if you meet with them and talk to them across the country, that's not going to change anything in their lives, since they will never be subject to the New Veterans Charter. Those who will benefit from this new charter are our new soldiers, the ones in Afghanistan or the Blue Helmets who are going to be deployed as part of peacekeeping missions. These are the people that need to be protected, but the charter does not protect them. You can list all the amounts you want, but the fact remains that your department is telling us the opposite of what you are saying. For these people, the charter is not any better than the old act.
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Blackburn, they are not familiar with the legislation. You have not explained it to them properly.
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Blackburn, you know that, when the rate of disability is 40% or less, it is better to be subject to the Pension Act. And the majority of people returning from Afghanistan have a disability of 40% or less. That means you are making money at the expense of veterans who are injured. Mr. Minister, it is written in black and white in the document from the Department of Veterans Affairs that I requested so that I could understand the difference between the new act and the old one based on the disability rate. You should not be fooling people like that.
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
I have one final question.
I remember that the last time we talked about this, there were no other witnesses left. We had reached the end of our list of witnesses and now we have another witness.
Who is this new witness scheduled for Monday? And what is happening on Wednesday?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
I would like to ask the analyst something about the report he is preparing. My question has to do with what I was saying earlier about the department providing us with a comparison between the two systems, the new charter and the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act. The department gave us the disability rates. Overall, there were three categories: 2% or 4%, up to 40%, and 100%. I would like these categories to be included in the report with the findings from Veterans Affairs Canada.
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to respond to Mr. Généreux and Mr. Holder. We are talking about five business days, and the House will be in recess for the next five days. So they will have nine days if you consider the business days and the five work days. That gives them plenty of time.
Furthermore, Mr. Chair, I hope that every department included its advertising expenditures in its budget envelope, because if every department did not, that would not be good. Every department is required to include every single one of its advertising expenditures. They are all required to include that spending in their total figures and budget envelope. So knowing how much they spent during the year should not be a problem for them. They have nine days to provide the information, when it should have already been taken into account. I don't think making it available in French should be a problem. Given what we have received so far, there should not be a problem with that.
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I don't want to be hard on you because, at the end of the day, you are not the ones with the final say on how and what advertising is done. Based on what you said, it is my understanding that ads come from the department and then go to Treasury Board for approval and funding. I also learned that part of your job was to check whether one of the three symbols appeared in the ad. You do not look at the content of the ad or have a say in it. Nor do you decide how much will be spent on the campaign. Is all that correct?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
I know that. I already said that.
What I am trying to get at is where you fit in to the whole process. What is your role? If the minister or the department is the one that makes the decisions, and final approval for any advertising comes from Treasury Board, what is your role in all this? Is it your job to find the consulting firm?
View Robert Vincent Profile
BQ (QC)
Ms. Smart, what is your specific role?
And what is your role in all this, Ms. Lebel-Ducharme? If the department makes the decisions, what do you do?
Results: 1 - 15 of 709 | Page: 1 of 48

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data