Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 2 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Tuesday, March 17, 1998
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 10:10 a.m. to consider the committee report on "The Aboriginal Soldier After the Wars".
Senator Charlie Watt (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Our hearing this morning relates to the work carried out by our committee under the chairmanship of Senator Andreychuk. Our report entitled, "The Aboriginal Soldier After the Wars" was submitted in March of 1995. Representatives of the Department of Veterans Affairs Canada and the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development are present, and I believe Mr. Nicholson will be making the formal presentation.
Mr. David Nicholson, Deputy Minister, Department of Veterans Affairs Canada: I would like to thank the committee for the invitation to attend this hearing and for the opportunity to make this opening statement. Before I go further, I would like to introduce the staff who are with me this morning. They are Mr. David MacDonald, Mr. Harry Adderley and Mr. Brice Bowen.
[Translation]
As you will remember, I appeared before your committee about four years ago, at the beginning of your inquiry on the way in which aboriginal veterans have been treated.
[English]
In November of last year, we provided the committee with a statistical report on the 34 witnesses who had complained regarding their individual treatment by Veterans Affairs. The letter in which the committee requested representatives of Veterans Affairs to attend this hearing contained four questions regarding that report.
The first question was whether we had been able to investigate all the cases brought to the attention of the committee. Our investigation process began with officials of Veterans Affairs attending committee sessions to hear and observe witnesses' testimony firsthand. At the committee proceedings we identified the 34 witnesses who had complained regarding their individual treatment by Veterans Affairs. Those witnesses' departmental and war service records were reviewed, and regional staff who deal directly with veterans were asked to provide individual reports. Information from all those sources was combined in a report which was intended to give this committee an accurate profile of the findings, while protecting individual privacy.
Your second question was whether clients who sought benefits not provided by Veterans Affairs were being referred to the appropriate source. That indeed is the practice of Veterans Affairs Canada. Being residents of the province and often of a community where the veteran resides, our counsellors normally have a good knowledge of local and provincial agencies which can be of assistance to veterans and other seniors. Our counsellors are encouraged to develop effective working relationships with those agencies, and they devote considerable effort to referring veterans and members of their dependants to those other sources of support.
Your third question asked about the appointment of an independent investigator. Over the years, Veterans Affairs has investigated hundreds of individual complaints by aboriginal veterans without turning up any evidence of mal-administration. It would appear then from the NAVA report to the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, to which I referred when I last testified, that NAVA had no more success than ourselves in producing any such evidence. "NAVA" is the acronym for the National Aboriginal Veterans Association.
Like those earlier investigations, our review of the cases raised before the committee produced no evidence of mal-administration. Under the circumstances, I can see nothing which would justify the appointment of an independent investigator. Veterans Affairs, however, does remain ready to investigate any individual complaint and to provide a full report to the veteran or his representative.
I would now like to address your final question regarding a special outreach program for aboriginal veterans. Veterans Affairs has an obligation to provide all veterans, in all respects, with the same level of service. We do not have a mandate to give preferential treatment to anyone. That is what we would be doing if we set up a special delivery mechanism to serve aboriginal veterans in the absence of evidence that remedial action was needed to assure them of the same level of services of other veterans in similar circumstances. That being said, I do want the committee to know that Veterans Affairs is always prepared to initiate outreach projects for groups of veterans who we have reason to believe may not be receiving the level of service which they should, owing, in some cases, to geographical isolation or other factors. Past outreach projects have targeted such groups as veterans in the northern Prairies and northwestern Ontario.
Last summer our Pacific region undertook a very comprehensive outreach project on behalf of veterans in aboriginal and other communities in rural British Columbia. That project arose through the initiative of the B.C. chapter of the National Aboriginal Veterans Association. Four aboriginal students conducted that project during the summer of 1997. The Department of Indian Affairs paid their salaries; Veterans Affairs managed their work and covered administrative costs; and the National Aboriginal Veterans Association provided advice and liaison.
The preliminary report indicates that this project was well-received by people in the target communities. Its originators are enthusiastic about the possibilities for further projects of this sort. Fortunately, their enthusiasm coincides with a department-wide initiative, the client-centered service delivery approach which is intended to enhance our efforts to serve the changing needs of our clients, the veterans of Canada.
Among other things, we are seeking alternate service delivery methods that make sense in specific geographic areas. I look forward to the final result of the outreach project in the Pacific region, and to seeing our department participate in similar outreach projects in other parts of Canada as opportunities occur.
In conclusion, I would like to return to this committee's report, "The Aboriginal Soldier After the Wars". Among other things, that report addressed the apparent inconsistencies between the oral history and personal testimony of aboriginal veterans which indicate discrimination and neglect, and the written administrative records of the federal departments who served them which provide really no evidence of any such mal-administration. The committee demonstrated its sensitivity and fairness in deciding to give the oral history and personal testimony of those veterans the same weight and value as the official record.
We at Veterans Affairs are also dedicated to sensitivity and fairness. Veterans Affairs is only too aware that some aboriginal veterans view their post-war experience with anger, hurt, resentment and disillusionment. The committee's report shows how such feelings could have arisen from the rebuffs, discrimination and indifference which many aboriginal veterans encountered in Canadian communities when they sought to re-establish themselves in civilian life. We have no reason to believe that Veterans Affairs was part of that problem. Veterans Affairs may however be part of the solution to the extent that the department can deal with the veterans' present concerns.
We assume that our veterans honestly believe that they are entitled to the benefits for which they apply, however they do not always succeed in getting those benefits. For example, a disability pension or a pension increase may be denied. Economic support benefits may be suspended because the veteran's income from other sources has risen above the threshold, or the rules which govern the veteran's independence program may frustrate the veteran's plans.
We know from long experience that some veterans who experience such disappointments will suspect us of personal injustice. We also have to bear in mind that, irrespective of equality before the law and irrespective of our best efforts to give all veterans the same service and consideration, an aboriginal veteran who has experienced discrimination in civilian society can honesty perceive racial discrimination as the underlying cause of his failure to obtain benefits from Veterans Affairs. The work of this committee will be of lasting value in reminding us to deal with all of our clients in a way that recognizes their individual sensitivity, makes it as easy as possible for them to apply for benefits, and also encourages them to make full use of the appeal process when an application does not produce the result that the veteran first sought.
In closing, I would like to say that, over the past eight and a half years with the Department of Veterans Affairs, and over a long public service career, I have been and am now associated with a very caring, understanding and totally committed staff who work in the best interests of veterans.
The Chairman: In order to try to cut the time, we should allow Mr. King to make his presentation.
Mr. Matthew King, Director General, Strategic Policy, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development: I would thank the committee for the invitation to appear before you today. With me today is Mr. Dan McDougall, Mr. Robert Eyahpaise, and Mr. Richard Simison. Mr. Eyahpaise's unit prepared the report that was submitted to the standing committee this past November in response to complaints from Indian veterans who appeared before your hearings, and they will be pleased to respond to your questions about that report.
[English]
Before we get to your specific questions, however, I thought it would be useful to provide a general overview of the federal government's commitment to renew the relationship with Aboriginal people. It will hopefully provide a context in which you can situate our discussions today and situate the activities we have underway in partnership with aboriginal veterans.
[Translation]
In preparing for this appearance today, we reviewed the committee's March 1995 report entitled "The Aboriginal Soldier After the Wars". We were struck by the similarity of conclusions reached by your committee with respect to aboriginal veterans' issues and by the conclusions of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples with respect to aboriginal issues more generally. We were equally struck by how the approach embodied in the federal government's new aboriginal action plan may fit with each of these reports.
The first recommendation of your 1995 report was:
That the Government of Canada, on behalf of the Canadian people: recognize the special contribution of Aboriginal veterans during the First and Second World Wars, and the Korean War, and
apologize to Aboriginal veterans for the inequities and insensitive treatment they experienced after their return from these wars.
Similarly, the overriding conclusion of the royal commission was that before the relationship with aboriginal people can be healed, before we can move forward together with aboriginal people, "a great cleansing of the wounds must take place".
On January 7 of this year, the federal government formerly launched Canada's aboriginal action plan called "Gathering Strength". It is a plan for renewal built around three themes: recognizing past mistakes and injustices, commencing reconciliation, healing and renewal, and building a joint plan for the future.
At the heart of the "Gathering Strength" action plan is the commitment to address the needs of communities by building real partnerships with aboriginal people. The plan is centered around four objectives: renewing partnerships, strengthening aboriginal governance, developing a new fiscal relationship, and supporting strong communities, people and economies.
[Translation]
Our goal is to work closely with aboriginal people and other partners on a variety of issues aimed at providing the appropriate tools to build the means and capacity to effect social change.
[English]
The federal government's commitment to renew the partnership with aboriginal people was initiated by a Statement of Reconciliation. This is a sweeping statement that marks a very significant departure from past approaches by the federal government. The Statement of Reconciliation set out to deal with the legacies of the past, to commit to learn from the past and not repeat it, and to find ways to begin to deal with the negative impacts that certain historical decisions continue to have on our society today. As such, it recognized the historic existence of diverse, vibrant aboriginal nations and the valuable contribution that aboriginal people continue to make and made to the newcomers to this continent. It also recognized the contributions aboriginal people are making today to Canada's development and to our society, but that our subsequent history of the treatment of aboriginal people is not something in which we take pride. The statement noted that attitudes of racial and cultural superiority led to a suppression of aboriginal cultures and values, and that the result of these historical actions was the erosion of political, economic and social systems of aboriginal people and nations.
To deal with these legacies, the federal government expressed its profound regret for past actions which contributed to the difficult pages in the history of our relationship. To the victims of sexual abuse in residential schools, the federal government indicated that it was deeply sorry. While the statement did not explicitly reference the history of the treatment of aboriginal veterans or indeed other groups of aboriginal people, it seems that the history of aboriginal veterans does provide a good example of the situation the statement is attempting to address. In some ways, the story of aboriginal veterans is a microcosm of the history of aboriginal people generally.
As your committee's report so clearly demonstrates, the participation of aboriginal people during war time service was impressive. Aboriginal soldiers served with honour and dignity and in unprecedented numbers, and yet the testimony of aboriginal soldiers indicates that when they returned from service they were met with prejudice and intolerance. Hopefully, aboriginal veterans will be able to accept the Statement of Reconciliation offered by the federal government. Ultimately, it is individuals who must be able to see themselves and their situations in the statement to allow the required cleansing of past wounds to begin.
This leads me to the next part of my remarks: how we are working with aboriginal veterans to forge a partnership that makes the future more promising. One particular project which is very noteworthy is the aboriginal veterans' scholarship. This fund, to which the federal government has contributed $1.15 million, has been established in cooperation with aboriginal veterans' organizations and is administered by the National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation. The fund has been set up as a trust, and interest earned by the trust will be used to provide scholarships to aboriginal students enrolled in the fields of study that support and contribute to aboriginal self-governance and economic self-reliance. Our understanding is that the trust has matured this year and the achievement foundation will be announcing the first successful applicants by August 15, 1998.
DIAND has been able to support the NAVA in its project to erect an aboriginal veterans' monument in Confederation Park in Ottawa to honour the exceptional contribution made by aboriginal veterans. While the funding for establishing the monument is being solicited through a fundraising campaign, the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development provided $84,000 in seed money to help get the project fundraising underway. With the help of Senators Taylor and Marchand, our understanding is that good progress has been made in securing the funds necessary to erect the monument.
Finally, we would like you to be aware of one other project in respect of which we recently entered into an agreement with NAVA. It is the "Aboriginal colours" project. The idea of the project is to prepare a set of military colours similar to regimental colours which will identify battles in which Canada's aboriginal veterans served, and to design a medal to honour the contribution of aboriginal veterans.
One element of note in this project is the outreach component which links to the specific questions we are here to address today. The work plan calls for a community outreach partnership. Researchers participating in the community outreach partnership will be responsible for identifying aboriginal veterans, interviewing them to document their military honours and any anecdotal information and reminiscences they volunteer and, perhaps most importantly, providing the veterans with information regarding benefits to which they may be entitled and processes to access these benefits.
I conclude my remarks by reinforcing the underlying message of "Gathering Strength", and that is the commitment to work in partnership with aboriginal people to address the needs of aboriginal people. It is a partnership that must include not only the federal government, but all sectors of government in Canadian society. We believe there are many positive examples underway with aboriginal veterans where this partnership is evolving.
Senator Chalifoux: Do you realize that there are three distinct aboriginal nations, one of which DIAND is not responsible for, the Metis? There have been many stories regarding the discrimination against the Metis veterans. What has your department or the Department of Veterans Affairs done to resolve some of these issues? I received a complaint about a week ago from the Metis veterans in Saskatchewan. What is your department doing to address those issues?
Mr. Nicholson: We consider all Canadian veterans to be special. In our mandate, of course, we do not distinguish between groups of veterans. All of our programs and services are designed to be applied equally to entitled veterans in Canada.
The two main gateways to all of our programming are through the Disability Pension Program, which means a person who has incurred a disability as a result of their service can have a claim adjudicated. Then of course, we have an income support program, the War Veterans Allowance which is an income tested program. If a veteran gains entitlement to that program through his service, we provide not only income support but a full range of health care services that may not be available in one province or another.
In terms of providing core funding to veterans' organizations, whether they be legions, the national council, NAVA, or any of the others, we do not have a mandate or financial authority to provide core funding from Veterans Affairs.
Mr. King: The aboriginal scholarship fund to which I made reference in my remarks is open to Metis veterans and Metis people generally.
Senator Andreychuk: I wanted to underscore what I think the aboriginal veterans told us as we went across Canada. Hopefully that is in line with what Mr. Nicholson has said. The veterans told us that a soldier was a soldier was a soldier. They wanted to do nothing to undermine that principle, and that is why the committee felt so comfortable in dealing with the aboriginal veterans. They understood their role and they carried it out well. They continued, despite their own personal grievances and difficulties. They understood what serving Canada meant. There has never been a plea by either the aboriginal veterans or by this committee that aboriginal veterans receive special treatment. They were asking for equal treatment, and my concern relates to the impediments to them receiving that equal treatment.
Listening to the representatives of DIAND today reminds me of sitting in court and listening to aboriginal leaders talk about the generic injustices that have led to the difficulties of young aboriginal people who are involved in criminal activity, and the response of the systems, judicial and correctional, which was that we have systems to help everyone. I am less concerned about what happens to the general issues because I feel they are being addressed by aboriginal leaders and by the government. My concern is that while those are being addressed, aboriginal veterans are dying without having received the benefits they should have received, or the acknowledgment that they should have received for having served Canada. I am concerned, in listening to all of you, that you are dealing with the overall issues. Have we actually addressed the concerns expressed by those aboriginal veterans who told us they were confused about the system, somewhat embittered about the system and feel they did not get their due?
While some veterans told us that they required certain services immediately, others told us that they simply wanted some acknowledgment of their contribution.
Has DIAND set up some systems to deal with the concerns of those veterans who appeared before our committee? Those seem to be the most embittered cases. Has some extra care and time been taken to do something for them?
Mr. Robert Eyahpaise, Acting Director, Lands and Trust Services, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: Foremost, I take your words to heart. These files are critical in terms of focus and the energy that we should be giving them. In our research analysis we considered the individual files that came before the committee, and we looked at them specifically as they were documented in our records.
As to investigating exactly how the benefits were administered and dealing with the individuals on a one-to-one basis, that did not take place because our priority was to analyze the report and prepare it for this particular committee. At that point we were not given the authority to investigate at a personal level.
However, we did investigate all the files that were submitted to us, 37 of which were related directly to lands. In our analysis, most of the concerns were documented, and we were able to provide a synopsis of actual expenditures or benefits that were provided to those individuals.
Mr. Richard B. Simison, Manager, Land Management and Advisory Services, Lands, Revenues and Trusts, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: I can summarize the findings of the DIAND review. Of the veterans who gave testimony before the committee in 1994 and before, approximately 73 concerns or complaints related to the Veterans Lands Act grants on reserves which were administered for Veterans Affairs by Indian Affairs generally through the Indian agents of the day. We did consider all 73 of those in light of the records available in the department and in the government.
Of the 73 I mentioned, 37 individuals had on reserve VLA files. Those files show that, of the veterans who complained of not having received the full amount of their on reserve VLA grant, all received the full amounts of their VLA grants.
Our work was based on the department's files. If an individual veteran asked for a copy of the findings from his file, we would be happy to provide a copy to him.
Senator Taylor: You mentioned that they all got what they were entitled to under the VLA. However, I believe that an aboriginal who applied for a VLA grant would often find himself in a Catch-22 situation in that he could only get a portion of the VLA grant because he could not encumber the title to the land because the land was on a native reserve. Am I not right that they did not access as much money as would have been the case had they been outside a reserve because they could not mortgage the land?
Mr. Simison: That is correct, senator. If they were off-reserve, they were entitled to the same benefits as a non-aboriginal.
Senator Taylor: Why was some effort not made to sort out this bureaucratic mess? It reminds me of a situation that might happen in HMS Pinafore by Gilbert and Sullivan. The aboriginal people have a right to a VLA grant, but because the land could not be used as collateral, no effort was made by DVA and yourselves to try to coordinate a system whereby they could access the full amount of money.
Mr. Nicholson: When the aboriginal or in this case status Indian veteran demobilized in 1945 and returned to his home community, if it was reserve lands under the administration of the federal government, the veteran had an option. He could decide to settle on off-reserve lands or settle on reserve lands which we all know are held in common and were administered then by the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs.
In the case of the veteran deciding to return and settle on the reserve, he was entitled to a grant of $2,320. That is the equivalent of the forgivable amount of the loan that an aboriginal veteran or a non-aboriginal veteran would receive from Veterans Land Administration if he settled off-reserve. Veterans were not denied in terms of the same value of free moneys. If they decided to settle off-reserve, they would receive a loan, and the amount of that would depend on the amount of land that they would purchase.
If you met the repayment requirements of the loan for a period of 10 years, the loan amount was reduced by $2,320. This forgivable portion applied to aboriginal and non aboriginal veterans. If an Indian veteran chose to take settlement on a reserve, they received $2,320 as an outright grant. No load was provided because the Indian Veteran could not buy reserve lands.
Senator Taylor: As far as you have gone, that is fine, but there was a second stage. Off-reserve veterans could borrow money from a bank or other financial institution and get some sort of matching or recognition from DVA. An additional amount of about $6,000 or $8,000 was involved. That is back when dollars were dollars, not 75 cents American. This was a bit of a bureaucratic mess. They could not borrow the money to access your money because they were on reserve. I think DIAND was a little unfeeling in that the band or the department could have put up some type of guarantee. Two sets of bureaucrats were refusing to bend. Consequently, the native farmer suffered. It would not have been difficult to work out the same type of guarantee, the same sort of security, that other individuals were getting.
Senator Andreychuk: We must not forget that a returning veteran might have difficulty getting all the information he would need to figure out all of this.
Mr. Nicholson: I do not know what type of information was made available to the returning veteran. I would like to think that they were given the opportunity to decide for themselves whether they wanted to settle on or off-reserve. If they were settling off-reserve, they would have the same report from the VAL as a non-aboriginal veteran, and I would hope that they would have the same response from the conventional lending community, the banks. If they were to go to a bank, I would like to think they would have the same opportunity to borrow as a non-aboriginal veteran because they would be pledging the security of the land, because it is private land.
As to why the band did not support them, there are people around this table who have been working in that difficult milieu for years and they will be better able to answer that question. Under the provisions of the Indian Act it would constitute the necessity of having a surrender for sale. When lands are held in common, getting the membership of an Indian reserve, the band, to agree to alienate a portion of land so it can be pledged to the banks is a very difficult undertaking for local government.
I would like to think the aboriginal veteran, from the advice provided from the DVA, was given the option of either settling on or off-reserve. In fact, many did settle off-reserve. There were 140,000 loans given out by the Department of Veterans Affairs following the close of World War II. I am sure some of those were made to aboriginal veterans.
Senator Taylor: Could the veteran retain aboriginal membership if he settled off the reserve and took land?
Mr. Nicholson: I will pass that over to Indian and Northern Affairs. That would be up to the chief andcouncil of the day. Many status Indian people retained their status even though they did not reside on Indian reserves.
Mr. Daniel McDougall, Acting Director of Policy Management, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development: There was no obligation to renounce your status or to become enfranchised in order to settle off-reserve.
Senator Andreychuk: I do not think the point of the report was to go back and relive 1945 to 1949. What is very clear to the committee members who sat at that time was that aboriginal veterans were subjected to a bureaucractic maze. Consequently, to make the choice of whether to go on or off-reserve, and weigh the benefits, perhaps they went through the exercise, but I do not think it was as meaningful nor were the results as good for the aboriginal as for the non-aboriginal.
We know that a lot of veterans were not satisfied with what they received. In that sense, the aboriginals and the non-aboriginals are the same. They wanted more recognition, et cetera. But we paid some attention to the fact that the choice for an aboriginal as to whether to go back to his communal way of living or to now assert the individual rights that had been imprinted on him through his experience overseas was slightly different from the choice that other aboriginals would have. There were about 73 cases of people who felt that they had not been heard or listened to. In many cases, some of their problems are no longer a direct result of their war situation, but somehow through the mythology and the problems, they feel they are being disadvantaged and they are not being recognized as veterans.
I think of one case where a veteran could have received all of the benefits that he was entitled to, either through the provincial government or through DVA, but chose not to because he wanted to live a certain way. It was the family that was feeling bad. The daughter said, "My father is ailing; he is dying and he does not have the services." When I sat down with the daughter, she said, "He will not go to a DVA hospital. He wants to die on his land." We sat down with the daughter and told her that this is not the fault of the Canadian government or DVA or DIAND; her father is making that choice. She said, "But I am watching my father die without help." She needed the help. So we linked her up with support services in the cancer system. That is all that was needed.
Our plea in our report was for that kind of personal involvement with the 73 cases, to let them know that they are important; our report did not seek to determine that there was mal-administration or to determine in whose bailiwick these people belonged. Someone must tell them that they are very important and to at least acknowledge for their families that they are not forgotten. It is that kind of thing that we were after. While you have done another re-analysis and you seem to have dealt with them as fairly as you could as an administration, 73 people still have not received that personal contact that is very important. I am hoping that the outreach programs you have talked about will be of some benefit.
Mr. Nicholson: I think we have done better than the outreach program. First of all, out of the 73, as a result of our initial review of the names in the files, we knew that 34 had tabled specific complaints about the Department of Veterans Affairs in terms of the level of service that they were not receiving. This will be a long answer but I will make it interesting.
There are 432,000 veterans alive in Canada today. I am picking up on something that you said in your question. You said that they were not satisfied with the level they have received. As the deputy minister of the department, that is something that I deal with every day, and I will explain why.
Of the 432,000 veterans living in Canada, 110,000 veterans are in receipt of a service or benefit, and a great many more widows. There are approximately 220,000 veterans and dependants receiving a service or benefit from VAC. I think our case load today is about 220,000. That means that of the veterans alive today, two-thirds of them are not receiving a benefit. They could attribute the same sort of analysis to our program, not satisfied with what they are receiving. It is something I deal with every day. Many citizens of Canada feel that if you served during the Second World War, and we had a million people in uniform, that if you fall ill or your economic situation is such that you cannot look after yourself, then the Department of Veterans Affairs will provide a benefit. That is not necessarily the case.
If you do not have a disability, then you do not receive a disability pension, and that disability must be related to your war service. If you are a veteran from the Canadian Forces and you are in a situation where you do not have enough money coming in to look after your basic needs, yes, we will provide a war veteran's allowance. Accompanying that are some health benefits.
A great many veterans and Canadian citizens say, "Such and such a man served in the war; why are you not paying the bills?" We are not mandated or legislated to do that.
Of the 34 -- I have the list here; it has been provided to your committee -- 20 of them are receiving a War Disability Pension. Another 24 are receiving income-related benefits; one is on a POW Maltreatment Award; 20 receive a War Service Gratuity; five receive re-establishment credit; four are awaiting returns allowance; and 22 of the 34 are receiving the Veterans Land Act establishment.
So in terms of our examination against the complaints that were made, I would have to say that, relatively speaking, those who came before your committee are receiving a benefit from the Department of Veterans Affairs; and against the total of veterans in Canada and the ones receiving benefits against that total, about a third, their percentage is a little bit better.
Senator Taylor: First of all, I thank you for saying that I am looking after the aboriginal war monument there. It is not moving forward as fast as it should. Maybe you could take back to your department the comment that we made request some time ago for an assistant, for somebody to be seconded. There are a lot of people that must be contacted. I believe the minister said in Vancouver awhile ago that funds in the amount of $40,000 were set aside to help second someone with secretarial skills to help our committee raise funds. We cannot find anybody who knows where that came from. We have been pushing a lot of buttons, but like the man with a new TV set, I am not getting anything on the screen yet. Maybe I can plug into you and find out whether that is true. The response from the public has been quite good, but it is still a question of being out there and shaking the tree a bit.
Your scholarship fund was very well received and well thought of. The only complaint I have heard is that you mentioned that it was being administered by the Aboriginal Achievement group. My understanding is that there are no members of NAVA, the Aboriginal Veterans Association on that committee. Would that not be a desirable thing to have? I do not mean control, but there should be some members on the committee. Can you say why there are not?
Mr. McDougall: I am not sure in particular why there are not. I know that when the decision was made as to who would administer the fund, it was through a consultation process in which the veterans associations did participate, so we can investigate as to why there are no members of NAVA or the other aboriginal associations on the Achievement Foundation, but certainly the initial decision was made in consultation with those groups. I suspect that they may have been looking for an existing foundation to keep administrative costs down and to facilitate the work of the fund.
Senator Taylor: I do not think there is anything wrong with that Aboriginal Achievement group because they have a record of administering funds and they do very well. It is a large group. It would be a good idea to have a member or two of NAVA serve on the Aboriginal Achievement group, to help address the feeling of alienation. This is, after all, a scholarship given out in their memory and name; there should be one or two of them on the board.
Mr. McDonald of DVA mentioned 34 files; and at DIAND there are 37. Are they one in the same or different groups?
Mr. Nicholson: Those are my figures. Thirty-four of those 73 had a specific complaint that we ran down.
Senator Taylor: DIAND says they looked at specific complaints of 37.
Mr. Nicholson: They were looking at another aspect probably. The evidence given by the witnesses probably indicated to DIAND that they would have to run down different complaints. We were looking at the benefits only for Veterans Affairs.
Senator Taylor: As Senator Chalifoux talked about, a number of Metis people will now come under Bill C-31. Does DIAND have any method of picking those up and classifying them or looking at their veteran awards?
Mr. Eyahpaise: The 37 we looked at strictly related to the legal definition of what Indian lands are, so that is why there is a discrepancy in the numbers. They were looking at the benefits. We were looking specifically to a land context for our analysis.
As far as information that becomes available under Bill C-31, there is a mechanism by which we could look at individual files and be able to determine when the individuals regain their status, so to speak. I do not think any Bill C-31 analysis was necessary in these files. When they were enfranchised or non-members, we were looking at historical documents; but in terms of the switch, the change would have taken place where they would be regaining their status, that would have been accounted for.
Mr. Nicholson: This is probably important because one of the concerns that the committee had was the level of contact the aboriginals or veterans have with the Department of Veterans Affairs. For example, the 34 that I refer to that had specific complaints against the Department of Veterans Affairs received a total of 119 individual benefits at one time or another. To me, that indicates that those 34 had contact with the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Indeed, of the 34, 29 of them now are receiving a monthly benefit from the department. No question, there is contact there.
Senator Forest: I wanted to return for a moment to Senator Andreychuk's concern and her observation that often communication and a personal response can smooth troubled waters. You have done this research, you have found some interesting answers. Have these 34 people been contacted personally?
Mr. Nicholson: Yes. In fact, Mr. Adderley can probably give you some details as to the exact process we followed to contact the 34 aboriginal veterans who gave testimony to this committee.
Mr. Harry A. Adderley, Director, Special Projects, Veterans Affairs Canada: We of course did conduct research from war service records from departmental files on all of those people. We also asked the regions, who actually do benefit delivery, to look into the concerns of those veterans.
Most of the veterans are getting benefits that still require regular contact, so they would have been in regular contact with the department. I would assume that virtually all of those people would have been spoken to at some recent time by somebody in the department.
Senator Forest: There seemed to be a concern that they as a group were being adversely discriminated against. Would they have had the benefit of these statistics which, in effect, show that they were not discriminated against?
Mr. Adderley: The statistics were provided to your committee. They were not provided to the individuals.
Senator Adams: I just wanted to get back to that scholarship. How will the moneys be distributed? How many kids will benefit from the scholarship? How did it come up at little over a million dollars?
Mr. King: Senator, my understanding is that the $1.15 million has been placed in a trust for two years now and this will be the first year that the trust has matured. Scholarships will be awarded out of the interest only that the trust earns, so with proper management one would hope that the trust could go on, if not in perpetuity, for a good long time.
As to who would be eligible to apply for a scholarship, I believe it is open to any aboriginal student who is studying in an area that would be perceived by a committee to further the goals of self-government or to further the objectives of economic self-reliance or economic development. I do not think it is tied to the family of a veteran per se. It is open wider than that and any aboriginal student could apply.
Senator Adams: Do you know how many scholarships will be awarded out of the new scholarship fund?
Mr. King: We do not have that information. The fund is being managed by the Aboriginal Achievement Foundation. I do not know how many applications they expect to accept this year because I do not know the level of interest the trust has earned to date, but I would imagine, when it fully matures, that it will fund several students per year.
Senator Adams: My next question has to do with the proposed commemorative statue. We certainly do not want to see anything resembling the statue we have here where there is an Indian lying at the feet of a white man. Do you know what site has been chosen for this memorial?
Mr. King: NAVA has determined that they would like the statue to be situated in Confederation Park where there are already a number of military statues commemorating various campaigns. In my view, coming from Ottawa, it is a very beautiful spot. Our understanding is that the fund raising effort is moving along. I can get back to you in a day or so with where we are on that. Hopefully the veterans monument will be completed at the same time as the regimental colours project. That is our goal.
Mr. McDougall: My understanding is that NAVA has been working with the National Capital Commission who administers the land, and that they have agreed upon the positioning of the statue on the land.
Senator Adams: Can you give me some detailed information about the size of statue and the site that has been chosen?
Senator Taylor: Perhaps I can be of some assistance. Before I took over the chair, approximately $84,000 had been spent to design the statue which will be almost three stories high, with four faces recognizing World War I, World War II, the Korean war and the contribution to our peacekeeping forces, as well as aboriginal men and women. The National Capital Commission donated the site during a ceremony last summer. The site will be just south of the National Arts Centre. It will be a substantial size and the budget is approximately $1 million. Hopefully that will be raised this year and the statue will be ready for November 11, 1999. The National Capital Commission, in accepting a $100,000 endowment, has agreed to look after the site in perpetuity.
Senator Adams: Will there be any further annual charges by the National Capital Commission?
Senator Taylor: We want the statue to be looked after. The agreement is that they will look after it in perpetuity for a $100,000 grant. In this day and age where the bottom line is the main consideration, my preference is that we have an agreement for its maintenance rather than assuming that the parks department will look after it.
To follow up on the nine recommendations of our committee a few years ago, I am not sure we have made any progress in respect of three of those. One was that the Royal Canadian Legion ensure a formal role for aboriginal veterans at the National Remembrance Day ceremonies. There has been some complaint that that has not been taken dealt with. Is this within the scope of responsibility of DVA?
Mr. Nicholson: That is really the purview of the Royal Canadian Legion which manages the Remembrance Day Ceremony on November 11 each year. It is led by the Vice Regal Party. For many years they have had a tradition respecting the makeup of that particular group.
Senator Taylor: Would a letter from you and from me to the Legion help facilitate this matter?
Mr. Nicholson: I do not know what previous contact has been made, if any, by your committee, but that is completely within your purview.
Senator Taylor: Another recommendation was the committee thought that an investigator, some type of ombudsman, should be appointed for quick intervention on behalf of aboriginal veterans. That was recommendation 6.2. The investigator would be in DVA, and could operate freely with respect to aboriginal veterans. Do you have any comment on that?
Mr. Nicholson: Yes. I commented on the same question four years ago. Essentially, my job is to run down any complaints that come in concerning the Department of Veterans Affairs. If you look at our track record in terms of following up on the witnesses that appeared before your committee -- and I refer to the 34 that had specific complaints against the department -- you will see that we move very quickly to determine if there is any basis for these complaints. As a result of our review, we have found that there is no basis but, perhaps, a lack of communication. I see no requirement for an ombudsman or an investigator within the Department of Veterans Affairs. I have 3,250 people across the country who do that work.
Senator Taylor: You investigated your own files. Is that abstract justice?
Mr. Nicholson: I understand where you are coming from. Two or three years ago, the National Aboriginal Veterans Association undertook an intensive examination of aboriginal veterans' files. Close to 300 individuals had some concern about mal-administration in terms of their services and benefits. NAVA, an independent group, could find not one case of mal-administration and fraud.
Senator Taylor: Our last recommendation was that the Government of Canada provide sufficient funding to the National Aboriginal Veterans Association and other established veterans' groups to effectively carry out the functions. That falls back in DIAND's lap. In this day and age of self-government and financial assistance to various First Nation's people and aboriginal groups to pull themselves up by their own boot straps, in the economic and business sense, it seems to me you should be able to find a few shekels in that massive bureaucracy to contribute to the funding. Most veteran's associations are strapped for cash. We must do something besides apologizing for the schools and setting up scholarships. I realize you cannot fund every group that asks for financial assistance, but a grant that helps them help themselves would not be a bad idea.
Mr. King: My understanding is that core funding to NAVA, for example, was traditionally provided by the Department of Heritage. About two years ago, in the context of the program review exercises that were undertaken at the time, Heritage decided to cease core funding to a number of organizations, both aboriginal and non-aboriginal. That left NAVA in a precarious position.
Since that time we have tried to backfill, on a project basis, some of the funding they lost from the Department of Heritage. I mentioned the $85,000 for the monument fund. We put another $80,000 into the colours project. In this way, we hope that our single department can help NAVA to continue to do the work that is really important. We do not have a mandate to provide core funding to any additional groups. As I say, we try to help out on a by-project basis.
The Chairman: Do you have a regional office in each province?
Mr. Nicholson: We have district offices spread out across the country. Our headquarters are in Charlottetown, PEI. We do not have a regional office in each of the provinces. We have one regional office for the Atlantic, a regional office in Quebec, a regional office in Ontario, an office in Winnipeg for Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, and a regional office in Vancouver for British Columbia. We have 29 district offices that are scattered throughout the geographical area, and generally close to the larger population centres, including larger populations of veterans.
The Chairman: Do those offices deal strictly with the veterans, that is 432,000 living veterans that you mentioned earlier, and their survivors?
Mr. Nicholson: Yes. We do provide certain services to the still serving and retired regular force. We also do adjudication for disability pensions for the RCMP.
The Chairman: Is there no distinction in Veterans Affairs between aboriginal and non-aboriginal veterans?
Mr. Nicholson: There are no distinctions. However, we do realize that, because of the isolated locations of some of the aboriginal communities, we must have extra initiatives to reach people who are scattered throughout the north, for example.
The Chairman: I would imagine that, in the administration involved for two types of veterans, one a non-aboriginal veteran and the other an aboriginal veteran, different criteria would apply, because some responsibility for the aboriginal group would fall squarely on the shoulders of the Department of Indians Affairs and Northern Development. That probably has caused some confusion as to who is and who is not eligible for certain assistance and so on. I believe that confusion still exists in the minds of certain aboriginal veterans. Indeed, some of our witnesses have told us that it does.
I believe the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development has a regional office which is not primarily geared to deal with veterans' issues but to deal with the administration of the lands and the people on the reserves. Am I correct in assuming that is how the infrastructure is laid out across the country, that is, your regional office does not deal only with veteran issues?
Mr. King: The opposite is in fact true. Our regional structure is similar to that of DVA. Within each of our regions we have a number of district offices. For example, in Western Canada we try to situate our district offices as close as we can to pockets of the bigger First Nations' territories in the area. However, no service is offered which explicitly relates to aboriginal veterans' issues. Ours is more of a multi-purpose office.
The Chairman: Do you know if aboriginal veterans believe that they have adequate access to your district offices?
Mr. Nicholson: We have three modes of service delivery. One is telephone, one is mail, and one is walking to our offices. However, our main point of contact with all veterans is through our counsellors. We have about 400 counsellors who travel into the isolated areas, and we try to ensure that their case loads are such that they can make contact with veterans and survivors at least once a year, and more frequently by telephone, through the mail, and what have you. As for the group of veterans who receive benefits from us, they have a contact first of all with their counsellor who reports out of a district office. The district manager allocates what time the counsellor is to spend in certain areas when he is out in the field. We are dedicated solely to veterans' benefits and services.
The Chairman: The Department of Veterans Affairs has responsibilities which are similar to those of your department.
Mr. King: The only direct delivery of a veterans affairs program undertaken by our department took place during the life period of the VLA. In the period immediately preceding the war and a period of 10 or 12 years afterwards, our department, through the Indian agent, was involved in the delivery or the administration of the VLA grant to returning soldiers who had chosen to resettle on reserve. Even for such soldiers, the Department of Veterans Affairs continued to deliver all of the other services. Our scope of activity was limited to the administration of this $2,320 grant. Once that was completed, the Indian veteran returning to the reserve would look to the Department of Veterans Affairs for all of the other programming that was due him or her.
The Chairman: It seems to me that the Department of Indian Affairs is being left out in the cold and that, no matter how we try to deal with these problems, the numbers do not diminish. The problems are not being solved. I acknowledge that the number of genuine complaints is going down, but there are still people out there who feel they have not been treated fairly.
To rectify that, would it be expedient to establish some sort of a task force to deal with these complaints once and for all? I am not talking about reviewing records, I am saying that you should go out and deal with the people directly. We can provide a list of the names and numbers.
Mr. Nicholson: To agree with you I would have to accept the premise that there were aboriginal veterans out there who were not receiving a service to which they were entitled, and I do not accept that.
The Chairman: I am not totally convinced either. However, how are we going to conclude this matter?
Mr. Nicholson: The hearings that this committee conducted, which gave aboriginal veterans an opportunity to voice their concerns and complaints, I thought was one step in that direction. You heard from a pretty good cross-section of veterans from across the country who not only told you of their own individual experiences, but also of the experiences of others. Those witnesses comprised the list that we have gone through. The National Aboriginal Veterans Association has run through another 300 and can find no basis for the complaints.
As I indicated earlier, not every veteran in Canada is entitled to a benefit, whether they are aboriginal or non-aboriginal. They must have a disability or they must have a requirement for a level of income. Those are the gateways into our program. Even if you set up a task force that came to some conclusions, what could they do about it? Our job is to go out and administer these outreach programs. You could call them task force groups, if you will. We contact the veterans and ensure that, if they are entitled to a benefit, they will receive it. Our department gives any veteran the benefit of the doubt. We will conduct more of the outreach programs that we conducted in the Prairies, in the north, and in B.C.
The Chairman: Mr. Nicholson, I respect your statement that you believe you have done as much as possible to move towards rectifying these ongoing problems.
Perhaps the problems could best be dealt with by the Department of Indian Affairs, because your responsibility is pretty clear cut, and it is to make accessible to the aboriginal people any benefits to which they are entitled. Can we zero in on those individuals who have complained and tick off, one by one, their complaints as we deal with them? This has been going on for many years.
Mr. King: To summarize, our study identified approximately 37 people who, during the course of your hearings, indicated that, at some point in time, they felt they had not received the full benefits due to them as returning veterans. I would remind you Indian Affairs was responsible for administering only the VLA grant to soldiers returning home who had chosen to settle on reserve. That grant was $2,320. When we reviewed some of the testimony from your committee, it was clear that a number of veterans believed that they did not get their full $2,320 or there were variations on that complaint. That is what we have tracked down. We fully admit that it was a horrendously complex program. It was truly a program of its day. It was set up in such a way that would not allow fraud. There were too many checks and balances. One can only imagine the delay on the DIAND side that must have taken place. We are convinced that virtually every person who made that complaint actually received what he or she was due.
What we have not done of course is gone back and spoken to these 37 people and told them that we have all of the documentation that shows that they, in fact, did receive the benefits due to them upon their return. I think explaining or re-explaining the conditions under which this money was intended to pass hands would probably be useful. The bottom line for us is we are completely satisfied there was no mal-administration. We would be willing to take it upon ourselves to contact these people directly, subject to whatever limitations are in the Privacy Act that would prevent us from naming third persons and so on. We will contact the 37 who came up in our files and give them access to their own files. That may help to at least close the door.
The Chairman: That would be appreciated by the committee members. Perhaps you could provide us with a list of the people you will be speaking to. After you have contacted them, we would want to hear directly from the Department of Indian Affairs. Perhaps, at the same time, the Department of Veterans Affairs should be informed on this matter.
The issue of Metis veterans was raised. I know that the Department of Indian Affairs does not want to assume responsibility for administering the Metis. However, at some point in time, some department will have to assume that responsibility unless we can find another way of dealing with it. I would imagine those numbers already take into account the Metis. When you mention 432,000 veterans, I realize the Metis would be included in that number.
Will your department take on responsibility for the Metis?
Mr. King: I do not believe we have files.
Mr. Eyahpaise: We do not have the files.
The Chairman: Who has those files?
Mr. Nicholson: That is a very interesting question. All veterans' service files are really the property of the Department of National Defence. Most of them are resident in Canadian archives. When someone applies to us for a benefit or disability pension, we draw the file and try to find the linkage between the disability and whatever. We do not distinguish between status, non-status, or Metis. A veteran is a veteran. They get the same service whether they are Metis, status Indian, Inuit or any other group of Canadians.
The Chairman: I appreciate and understand that. Nevertheless, the Metis do not come under the Indian Act. I know some do not even speak English. It is difficult to distinguish between Metis and other Indians at times. Many are categorized as Metis who, in fact, are not. This matter must be rectified sooner or later. If the department is not mandated to take that responsibility, somehow we must find a solution.
Mr. Nicholson: I would like to elaborate on a reply I gave concerning the commemorative ceremonies at the National Monument on November 11. I indicated that the Royal Canadian Legion were responsible for the management of the event surrounding that day. I do not think I was clear in indicating that the aboriginal people do play a formal role that day. They are positioned in a special area along with the Royal Canadian Legion, the Merchant Navy Coalition, the Army, Navy and Air Force veterans of Canada, and the National Council of Veterans Association. Those are the five veterans' organizations that we relate to on an ongoing basis. Perhaps my answer to you may have indicated that when I mentioned the Vice Regal Party, that is the more prominent party on that day, but the Aboriginal Veterans Association has the same recognition and formal role as the other major veterans' organizations.
The Chairman: Thank you very much. Hopefully the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development will look into this further and by the end of the year we may have some answers.
I would ask committee members to stay so that we may deal with the remainder of our business.
The committee continued in camera.