November 5, 2018

CPC

James Bezan

Conservative

Mr. James Bezan (Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, CPC)

Mr. Speaker, keeping in mind that today is the New Democrats' opposition day and they are going to be talking about veterans, it is important to point this out. The former chair, or the current chair, in my opinion, of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association, the member for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, is a veteran herself. The Liberals claim that they are a feminist organization, yet they used Soviet-style antics to remove her from the chair. I am embarrassed and ashamed that the Liberals would employ this type of heavy-handed approach in taking over a parliamentary assembly. It completed violated the Constitution.

The member for Etobicoke Centre talked about the power of the chair to adjourn a meeting to maintain the decorum of the meeting. That was done. Then, after all the Conservatives left the room, cabinet members, including the Liberal House leader and the Liberal whip who were in the room, proceeded to empower the member for Etobicoke Centre to carry out a Soviet-style coup and took control of the NATO Parliamentary Association.

That is despicable and I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to make the ruling that this should not have been allowed to happen, that there are proper processes and procedures, both the Standing Orders and House procedures, as well as the constitution of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, that the association should be following about the proper removal of a chair and then having a proper nomination process, with proper notice given to all members of the NATO Parliamentary Association.

Topic:   Private Members' Business
Subtopic:   Points of Order
Sub-subtopic:   Meeting of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association
Permalink
CPC

Bruce Stanton

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker

I see other members standing. We should be appreciative of the time limit we are under because of the orders of the day before us.

The hon. member for Elmwood—Transcona.

Topic:   Private Members' Business
Subtopic:   Points of Order
Sub-subtopic:   Meeting of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association
Permalink
NDP

Daniel Blaikie

New Democratic Party

Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP)

Continuing with the theme of your remarks, Mr. Speaker, one of many important responsibilities we have is to prioritize work in the chamber. The opposition motion is about veterans in the week leading up to Remembrance Day. We spent a lot of time on this already. I know the member did not have to raise this point of order this morning, although it is his right and no one contests that, but there is a question of timing and prioritization. I would appeal to the members of the chamber to get on with the debate that has to do with serving veterans better.

Topic:   Private Members' Business
Subtopic:   Points of Order
Sub-subtopic:   Meeting of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association
Permalink
LIB

Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, I would not want the Speaker to necessarily buy into everything that has been said. For example, my understanding is that the government House leader was not at the meeting. I am not even sure why this issue is before the House, but that will be for the Chair to ultimately decide. Some of the information I have heard and read is disturbing, such as drinking in committees and so forth. They are very concerning.

Topic:   Private Members' Business
Subtopic:   Points of Order
Sub-subtopic:   Meeting of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association
Permalink
CPC

Bruce Stanton

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker

I thank hon. members for their additional comments on the matter and for keeping them reasonably concise. We are certainly taken up with this issue and all of the interventions will be considered in the decision on this matter relatively soon.

Topic:   Private Members' Business
Subtopic:   Points of Order
Sub-subtopic:   Meeting of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association
Permalink
NDP

Gord Johns

New Democratic Party

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

moved:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should automatically carry forward all annual lapsed spending at the Department of Veterans Affairs to the next fiscal year, for the sole purpose of improving services for Canadian veterans, until the Department meets or exceeds its 24 self-identified service standards.

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my good friend and colleague from Jonquière.

Canadians love our military and RCMP veterans and their families. We thank them for their service and sacrifice. However, thanking veterans and their families is not enough. Words must be backed by action, so I am pleased to rise in this place today and put forward this motion. If passed and implemented by the government, the motion will dramatically improve the lives of veterans and their families at no additional cost to taxpayers.

The motion seeks to end the practice of leaving hundreds of millions of dollars unspent each year at Veterans Affairs Canada and instead transfer those dollars to the next year for the sole purpose of improving services for veterans.

While the motion is inherently non-partisan and forward-looking, we must provide some historical background to demonstrate why it is needed.

In the nine years of the Harper Conservative government, more than $1.1 billion of spending that was approved by Parliament for the Department of Veterans Affairs was left unspent. This money was left unspent while the government cut more than 1,000 full-time jobs at Veterans Affairs and closed nine regional offices. The effects of those cuts are still being felt today, as there is a tremendous backlog in the administration of nearly every program and service delivered to veterans through Veterans Affairs.

Canadians were unhappy with this practice among others and voted for change in 2015. Throughout the 2015 election campaign, the Liberals campaigned on ending lapsed spending and improving services at Veterans Affairs Canada. Unfortunately, they have been unable to deliver on either commitment in their government.

In its first three years, the Liberal government has left $372 million unspent at Veterans Affairs and has done so while meeting just 12 of its own 24 service standards for that department.

Some may argue that lapsed spending is nothing more than an administrative issue and that this money is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, but New Democrats disagree. Presently the Department of Veterans Affairs employs 2,609 full-time employees across the entire department. Had it chosen to spend the $372 million that was left unspent, the government could have hired over 5,000 more full-time caseworkers instead of the 260 it has done so far. Making use of the lapsed spending in this department could make a real difference in the lives of veterans, especially if it is dedicated solely for the purpose of improving services as prescribed in this motion.

Ending lapsed spending in the department is important, but the motion proposes so much more than that. Passing and implementing it will ensure that each and every one of the 24 service standards at Veterans Affairs are met and do so within the existing operating budget of that department.

What does that mean exactly?

We can view all of the 24 service standards on the Department of Veterans Affairs website, but in real life it means that when veterans or family members call the department for help, they will actually get their calls answered quickly. It means that hundreds of caseworkers, who are so desperately needed, can finally be hired and that the veteran to caseworker ratio will never be more than 25:1 again. It means that those caseworkers will finally be able to clear the backlog of applications for disability benefits and that future applicants will receive their decision in a timely manner.

Indeed, if the motion is passed, it will clear all the backlog for all programs and services at the department: for long-term care applications, for rehabilitation programs, for career transition programs, for earning-loss benefit applications and for the war veterans allowance program. It will mean that if veterans or their families are unhappy with the department's decision to deny them benefits, they will be able to appeal those decisions and receive a resolution quickly.

In short, if the motion is passed, it will mean that we can finally fix the Department of Veterans Affairs once and for all, without spending a dollar more than what is budgeted and approved by Parliament. Carrying forward unspent money at Veterans Affairs and using it to improve services is a no-brainer, but make no mistake. We know that meeting all 24 of the existing service standards is just as difficult as it is important.

However, I was greatly concerned to read in a Globe and Mail article, published on October 9, that a departmental official confirmed that Veterans Affairs was actively working on lowering its service standards instead of trying to meet its current targets. Lowering the service standards at Veterans Affairs is not a solution to these problems and it is not in the best interests of veterans and their families. We can and we must do better.

I am proud that New Democrats were the first to uncover the problem of lapsed spending at Veterans Affairs in 2013 and I am proud to rise today on behalf of New Democrats to offer a solution.

Lapsed spending at Veterans Affairs was first raised in the House by former New Democrat member of Parliament John Rafferty back in 2013. As the Conservatives cut 1,000 jobs and closed nine regional Veterans Affairs, John sought answers on behalf of the constituents of Thunder Bay—Rainy River. Why were they losing their regional office? Why would his constituents be forced to drive to another province to receive face-to-face service from Veterans Affairs? Surely there was $5 million available somewhere at Veterans Affairs that could keep the Thunder Bay and other offices open.

As usual, John's instincts were correct. He requested a departmental briefing, and during that presentation, a budget line simply titled “lapsed” was discovered.

Veterans Affairs officials confirmed that this money that had been approved by Parliament was left unspent. In the same year the Conservatives were closing nine Veterans Affairs offices to save $5 million, New Democrats found that the department was failing to spend more than $170 million of its approved budget. With $170 million, the government not only could have saved those nine offices, but could have opened hundreds more.

On behalf of New Democrats across Canada, we need to thank John for working so hard on behalf of veterans and his constituents. There is no doubt in my mind that the Thunder Bay Veterans Affairs office was reopened as a direct result of his hard work. Everyone in this place sends him strength, good wishes, and all the best while he fights his health battle right now.

While it is true that the government plans to spend more money in the future, and some benefit levels are increasing for some veterans, the current level of service provided by the department to the same veterans is completely unacceptable. After all, what good will more program spending be for veterans and their families if no one in the department is there to answer their phone call or process their applications. The $10 billion the government talks about will not help anyone if there is no one there to answer the phone.

Finally, I have heard that some in this place believe that the transfer of lapsed spending from one year to the next is prohibited. This is false. In a 2015 report titled, “Why does the government lapse money and why does it matter?”, the Parliamentary Budget Officer wrote:

The Government manages an administrative framework to accommodate the shifting of lapsed funding from one year to the next.

I have a copy of that report in both official languages for tabling at the conclusion of my remarks.

New Democrats have a proud tradition of supporting Canada's veterans. I would also like to thank former NDP MP Peter Stoffer and the current member from London—Fanshawe for their outstanding work on behalf of veterans and their families.

To my colleagues here in all parties, we have a real chance today to do something very special for Canada's veterans. Together, we can finally end lapsed spending at Veteran Affairs, and deliver the high level of service that Canada's veterans and their families need and deserve, and were promised.

I urge my colleagues across political lines to support this motion so that we can all return home and deliver this good news in person to our veterans and their families this Remembrance Week.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
LIB

Darrell Samson

Liberal

Mr. Darrell Samson (Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his dynamic presentation. He does an excellent job. He is on the veterans affairs committee with me. I want to thank him for his continued advocacy.

I would also like to thank Peter Stoffer for his excellent work on veterans affairs, as I continue to work closely with him and with veterans in my riding of Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook.

I want to thank the member as well for underlining the important investment that our government has made in support of veterans, almost $10 billion, whereas the former Conservative government closed down nine offices. The Liberals brought back the pension for life. When I was doing town halls in my riding, I heard how important that is to veterans. The education program is a big investment as well. There are also the additional 470 service employees. Those are very practical and important benefits that will help, and continue to help, veterans.

I want to thank the member for that. Maybe he could share some of what veterans in his riding have said to him about these programs, the opening of nine offices that were closed by the Conservatives, the education program, or even the disability awards, which—

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
CPC

Bruce Stanton

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker

The hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
NDP

Gord Johns

New Democratic Party

Mr. Gord Johns

Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend and colleague and I sit together at the veterans affairs committee, meeting veterans and hearing from them. He often hears from veterans who have been waiting too long; waiting too long for their benefits and for someone to answer the phone. He knows full well that the backlog is growing. He has heard testimony at committee.

Therefore, I hope my colleague will support this motion today so we can fix this problem once and for all. This could be a really good day for veterans, as we can fix a long-growing problem. However, I will talk about some things my friend also spoke about, such as standards.

Only 43% of the time does the department meet its target of deciding on a veteran's disability benefits within 16 weeks, and with the career transition program, it only meets its target 31% of the time. The backlog is growing. We learned that it was 29,000 last November and that it had grown 50%. We learned in June that it had grown another 10%.

Here is an opportunity to use money that has not been spent but was approved by the House to hire people back that the Conservatives let go and promised to hire back. They promised to fix this problem. It is getting worse and there was money approved by Parliament that is not being spent that could fix this problem. Here is an opportunity to do that.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
CPC

Tom Lukiwski

Conservative

Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, CPC)

Mr. Speaker, I want to set the record straight for both the members of the NDP and the government side regarding the closure of nine Veterans Affairs offices by the former Conservative government.

While it is true that nine offices were closed, all of the staff in those offices were transferred to Service Canada locations within the same ridings. In fact, because of that, all of the Service Canada outlets were then able to provide services to veterans without those veterans having to go to a regional office.

Here is a concrete example. In Saskatchewan, prior to the change that made veterans services part of the core responsibilities of Service Canada, there were only two regional Veterans Affairs offices, one in Saskatoon and one in Regina. That meant that anyone who wanted to go speak in person to an official in a Veterans Affairs office had to travel to one of those two centres. We are a rule-based economy. We are also a rule-based province. I spoke to several veterans who had to make the trek from Estevan to Regina or Saskatoon, which is sometimes two to two and a half hours to get to an office. When we made the change to incorporate veterans services into Service Canada that meant that in almost every mid-sized town in Saskatchewan, there was a Service Canada official prepared and trained—

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
CPC

Bruce Stanton

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker

Order. The hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
NDP

Gord Johns

New Democratic Party

Mr. Gord Johns

Mr. Speaker, when the Conservatives were in government, they left $1.1 billion on the table. The ratio of caseworkers to case need was 47 to one under the Conservatives at the end of the last Parliament. They failed veterans miserably.

The government promised to fix the mess that the Conservatives left and it has not been able to do that. We are hoping that the Conservatives will acknowledge their mistakes, acknowledge the over 1,000 employees who were fired. It is the problem we have today that we are trying to fix. The Conservatives had $1.1 billion and did not need to fire anyone.

When my colleague talks about centralizing services into regional offices, I would point out that I was just north of 60 with the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs studying indigenous veterans. There is not one Veterans Affairs staff member north of 60, not one. There are over 1,900 veterans and 500 who are getting services from Veterans Affairs and 85 case files there right now, and not one staff member. I will not accept that. I hope they will support this motion and help fix this problem.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
NDP

Karine Trudel

New Democratic Party

Ms. Karine Trudel (Jonquière, NDP)

Mr. Speaker, before I begin my speech, I would like to salute the men and women in uniform who are watching us on TV right now here at home or abroad.

I feel fortunate to have this opportunity to talk about veterans. They represented Canada proudly, but I find that government after government has neglected them.

Veterans do not have access to all the services they deserve and are entitled to. That has to change. One example of how little consideration governments have shown veterans is the Harper government's decision to close regional offices. That decision felt like a harsh betrayal to veterans, who felt they should be able to count on personalized help, and they said so.

They felt the closures would make it harder for them to get the essential front-line services they need because of their health issues. They were right. At the time, veterans and Public Service Alliance of Canada people representing employees at the shuttered offices went to Ottawa to meet with the minister in an attempt to reverse Veterans Affairs' decision to close the regional offices, but their efforts were in vain.

Things have not gotten any better under the Liberals, either. As I said in question period last week, the Liberals are making promises to our veterans that they cannot even keep. They authorize spending but then keep the money, just as the Conservatives did. On the surface, this might look good, but the reality is altogether different.

The Liberals left $89.9 million unspent in 2016, $143 million in 2017, and $148.6 million in 2018. Without that money, veterans cannot access the services they are entitled to. As everyone knows, other departments also do not spend all the money allocated to them. When it comes to veterans, however, the full budget must always be used in order to give veterans a better life.

Since the government is accumulating a surplus within the department, since it is not spending all the money it budgeted for veterans, I definitely agree with my colleague's motion, which we are debating today. This is an absolute necessity, and I hope that all parties will vote to support the motion.

If the government is not sure how to spend the money that is allocated for veterans, I will gladly offer some suggestions today.

I am the granddaughter of a Canadian Armed Forces veteran who worked as a mine clearance expert on small navy vessels during the Second World War. My father worked for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for 35 years. He is currently retired. I am all too aware of what these people need and the challenges they face.

I have also been involved with legions and veterans since my election in October 2015. I am very attuned to their expectations and especially their needs. I also want to acknowledge the dedicated efforts of all the men and women who, day after day, volunteer in the legions in my riding, Jonquière, and everywhere in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. They give their all to their volunteer work, without counting the hours, because they believe in what they are doing and they want to help their loved ones. I learned a lot from talking with them about what they do and also about what we could do to fix certain problems.

Today, I would like to talk about a few projects aimed at improving the situation in my riding of Jonquière and in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. I would like to propose some solutions in case the government has money left over. That money could be invested. We see that there was a surplus, that the money was not all spent. Branch 235 in Chicoutimi already has a project that it wants to implement. The president of that branch told me what had been discussed with Legion members. They want to open a care facility for people in uniform, a place where men and women in uniform with operational stress injuries could get treatment. They could be treated directly in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. Right now, because of service cuts, they are unable to receive care in the area. They have to travel over 250 kilometres to get treatment, to have access to services.

That would take its toll on anyone. Often, when people have to leave their region, their home, and travel long distances, their family has to go with them. That can sometimes cause collateral damage and it creates stress. When people are unable to receive care in their own region, their injuries may take longer to treat.

The centre for military members project is ready to go and it could already be under way. The problem is that there is no appropriate federal program to make this project happen.

Presentations have been made to the government and Veterans Affairs. The department responded that it cannot buy the building because there is no program for this type of project. There is definitely a will to see this care facility open, but there is no program.

This could be a great opportunity for the government to develop a program that would make it possible for our veterans, like members of the Chicoutimi Legion Branch 235, to get this project off the ground. This centre for military members would finally be able to provide care to our men and women in uniform, who could then receive services in the Saguenay—Lac-St-Jean area.

As I was saying, I have been regularly attending these events for three years. I salute the members of the Arvida Legion branch 209. I will be there on November 9 to mark the 100th anniversary of the armistice and on November 11 to join them in remembrance of our men and women who fell in combat.

Every time I go there, which I will be doing again soon, the men and women talk to me about infrastructure. Many legion branches have facilities that require considerable investment over time. I already know that the government will say there are programs available to help. That may be true, but most of the programs they apply for require them to supply 35% to 50% of the funding themselves.

For these organizations, that is a lot of money. If the government could tweak its programs, it would make a huge difference, because these gathering places are tremendously important. Many veterans who are watching right now could tell us how vital it is for them to have places where they can meet up, reflect and talk about what is going well and what is going not so well.

I want to mention a wonderful initiative that, again, was created as a way to address the lack of services. Once a month starting in 2019, the Royal Canadian Legion branch 235, Chicoutimi, will open its doors for anonymous meet-ups where men and women suffering from operational stress can come to share their experiences and unburden themselves, as well as to learn about best practices and feel better knowing that they are not alone.

My time is running out, but I just want to close by saying that I hope that any future funding allocated to veterans is spent and goes towards services. Our men and women in uniform have worked to keep us safe. They are present every day in our communities.

I hope the government and all members in the House of Commons will vote in favour of the motion put forward by my colleague from Courtenay—Alberni today. I want to thank him for his work in the community and for bringing this motion to the House.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
LIB

Nick Whalen

Liberal

Mr. Nick Whalen (St. John's East, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member from Jonquière for her excellent speech on this very important debate.

I want to reassure her that the government is already ensuring that money returned to the treasury for quasi-statutory programs is used the following year to fund demand-driven veterans programs. She must already know this, since we sometimes serve together on the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates.

We have already instituted the pension for life, reopened nine offices closed by the Conservatives and hired 470 new employees. Does she think that we are heading in the right direction to support our veterans?

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
NDP

Karine Trudel

New Democratic Party

Ms. Karine Trudel

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, but that was a rhetorical question.

We had to move a motion in the House because there are still people waiting. The government's website shows that 12 of its 24 service standards have not been met. That is not even at 80%.

I said this in my speech, but I want to repeat it. The Liberals left $80.9 million unspent in 2016, $143 million in 2017, and $148.6 million in 2018. We are debating this motion moved by my colleague in the House today because there are still problems.

I have many more examples of the glaring lack of services, which I could perhaps talk about in response to another question.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
LIB

Francis Drouin

Liberal

Mr. Francis Drouin (Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her excellent speech.

I was not an MP between 2011 and 2015, but I know there were a lot of budget cuts under the previous Harper government, and I know my colleague was a member in the House at that time. Could she talk about the consequences of those budget cuts?

Furthermore, we just hired 470 new employees at Veterans Affairs, and I wonder whether she thinks that was the right thing to do.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
NDP

Karine Trudel

New Democratic Party

Ms. Karine Trudel

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

There has been a bit of progress, but the government promised us major investments. It allocated funding, but now the department has a surplus. That money is not being used.

Last year we worked with one of my constituents for a year. We supported this individual and listened to him. However, when I asked him simply how he was doing, he said he has not been able to reach a person by telephone, just to ask whether his application was accepted. This means that problems still exist, if our constituents still have to come to our local offices to let us know that they have not been able to speak with a person.

Investments have been made, but right now we are talking about services and money that was allocated. Surpluses are accumulating, so there must be a problem somewhere.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
CPC

Jim Eglinski

Conservative

Mr. Jim Eglinski (Yellowhead, CPC)

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a simple question. The Liberal government talks about its contributions to our military veterans, yet in the last two years, it has spent over $38 million taking our veterans to court. I wonder if the member would speak about that money maybe being better spent somewhere.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
NDP

Karine Trudel

New Democratic Party

Ms. Karine Trudel

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative Party closed nine offices that provided direct services to veterans and left $1.1 billion sitting in the coffers for 10 years, so the Conservatives are in no position to lecture the government.

However, we are talking now about services. Earlier, I talked about some of the projects that would help my region of Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. There are people who volunteer in our legions every day to provide services to our men and women in uniform. These people are ready. I therefore hope that the government will be open to the idea of the care centre for people in uniform that I spoke about earlier. That would be a great help to the people of my riding.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink
LIB

Francis Drouin

Liberal

Mr. Francis Drouin (Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, before I begin my speech, I would like to inform the House that I will be sharing my time with the member for Scarborough North.

Canada's veterans bravely defend the peace and security we all enjoy. Making sure that veterans and their families have access to the support and services they need when they need them is a major priority for me and for our government. That is why our government committed to do more to support the families of Canadian veterans. That is also why we are keeping our promise.

Veterans Affairs Canada has changed considerably over the past three years. The department is guided by a new vision focused on the general well-being of our courageous Canadian Armed Forces members, veterans and their families. Every year, we are putting more money toward programs and benefits for veterans based on their comments and recommendations. We are providing more and better support for veterans and their families. They told us of the need for flexibility, and we incorporated that into many of the programs and benefits we offer.

Every year, Veterans Affairs Canada estimates the number of veterans who will be applying for and receiving program benefits and calculates the amount of money needed accordingly. If fewer veterans use the programs or if fewer benefits are needed in a given year, then the money is returned to the fiscal framework, but never at the expense of a veteran who needs our services. What really matters is that every veteran who is entitled to a benefit receives it, whether we are talking about 10 veterans or 10,000. I think the minister has made that statement several times.

Veterans Affairs Canada is committed to providing flexible programs and services that are able to meet the changing needs of veterans and their families in order to ensure the smoothest transition possible. That is why we have launched a number of new and improved programs this year after consulting the veterans community and stakeholders on what factors contribute to a successful transition.

Family is a recurring theme. I know that we all understand the importance of families to the well-being of veterans. If a soldier becomes sick or injured in the line of duty, families and caregivers become an essential part of the veteran's post-service life.

Consequently, the Minister of Veterans Affairs increased the benefits available to veterans and their families. On April 1, we rolled out eight new and enhanced benefits connected to education, training, financial security, families and well-being. All of these benefits were developed with the well-being of veterans in mind.

I am pleased to say that, so far, the response from veterans has been exceptional. The career transition services were revamped to provide access to more people who have completed basic training. Furthermore, eligibility was expanded to include veterans, their survivors, their spouses and common-law partners, as well as members of the Canadian Armed Forces. They now have access to job search training, career counselling, information on the labour market, and information on the education and training they need to meet their career objectives.

All of these benefits were developed with the help of professionals who understand military culture. We have approved more than 950 applications since April 1.

We have also established a new education and training benefit to help veterans achieve these goals, fulfilling another campaign promise of helping veterans return to school and obtain the education or training of their choosing after their service. Veterans receive funding to attend the college or university of their choice. This new benefit covers up to $40,000 in tuition and other expenses for veterans who served six years and up to $80,000 for those who served up to 12 years. The money can be used to pay for tuition, course materials and living expenses. This is a flexible benefit that includes $5,000 for personal and professional development training. Almost 1,400 applications have been approved to date.

Those are just two of the new initiatives put in place since April 1 of this year. Six other measures were also implemented early in the year to better support members of the Canadian Armed Fores in their transition to civilian life after military service. The numbers speak for themselves. We are in a better position today to meet the needs of veterans and their families than we were in the past.

Leaving military service means big change for service people and their families. We know that community support can help. That is why Veterans Affairs Canada expanded the veteran family program to all 32 military family resource centres to ensure uninterrupted access. Military family resource centres used to be for active military personnel only. Now medically released veterans and their families will have access to military family resource centres across Canada where and when they need support. They will also have access to an information line and www.cafconnection.ca.

We know that when military personnel are on active duty, their families serve as well. That is why family members are part of the equation in developing veterans' rehabilitation plans. Family members can also access counselling and other services if that can help their veteran.

That is also why Veterans Affairs Canada eliminated the time limit for spouses, common-law partners and survivors to apply for its rehabilitation services and vocational assistance program. This change removes unnecessary pressure and provides more flexibility to adapt to post-service life.

Another new initiative is the veterans emergency fund. Now, a veteran or family member can request emergency financial support 24 hours a day, seven days a week. After all, emergencies do not just happen from nine to five Monday to Friday. We know that many veterans need our help.

These new benefits are part of an overall well-being package that combines financial recognition of pain and suffering, income replacement, and a host of wellness services and programs to help veterans and their families successfully transition to life after service.

With the pension for life announced by Veterans Affairs Canada, our government's total investment in veterans over three years comes to $10 billion.

The Government of Canada's support for Canadian Armed Forces members, veterans and their families starts not at the end of their mission, but at the beginning.

We pledged to make sure they get the respect, support, care and economic opportunities they deserve, and we are delivering on our promise every day.

That is why we go back to Treasury Board throughout the year to ask for more money to make sure all veterans and their families get the benefits they are entitled to. If there is money left over at the end of the fiscal year, that just means we were prepared to support even more veterans and their families.

We have made a lot of progress on supporting our courageous veterans, and there is still a lot left to do. The government will never stop working to improve the lives of our veterans and their families.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Business of Supply
Sub-subtopic:   Opposition Motion—Service Standards for Veterans
Permalink

November 5, 2018