Veterans Affairs Committee on Sept. 23rd, 2025

[Nishika Jardine]

It's a difficult question.

Based on what I see, on the one hand, this is taxpayers' money we're talking about, and therefore, I think it is important that the department have in place procedures, processes and policies to ensure that taxpayers' money goes where Parliament wants it to go. On the other hand, could things be more streamlined? I would hope so, because there are so many people who are saying this is so difficult. I certainly share that with the deputy and the minister when I speak with them.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Airdrie—Cochrane, AB]

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

Thank you very much, Mr. Richards.

Mr. Clark, you have five minutes.

[Braedon Clark, Liberal, Sackville—Bedford—Preston, NS]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Colonel Jardine and Mr. Schippers, for being here today. I really appreciate your time and the answers you've given us so far.

I want to follow up on the question Mr. Richards asked at the end. I spent time in the provincial legislature in Nova Scotia, and, of course, access to family doctors was probably the number one issue we dealt with there. In Nova Scotia, somewhere between 10% and 15% of the general population does not have access; obviously, it's different regionally.

There's an obvious interplay there between the provincial governments, VAC and others to make sure we can make progress on this issue. Could you talk a little bit about what that looks like? What is the interplay between the two levels of government to make sure that veterans actually have access to this and we start to move on what you identified as the number one issue you heard over the summer?

[Nishika Jardine]

I'm not sure I'm the person who's best placed to answer how the provincial and federal governments should work. I don't think I am qualified to answer that question.

All I can tell you is that the Canadian Forces veterans need this because they get their prescriptions, for example, through their military doctor. On the day they leave, they get their baggie with three months' worth of that prescription for whatever their medical condition is. If it's a complex medication, to get that refilled, you can't go to a walk-in clinic. You can't go to the ER. How that can be done is the thing to be figured out.

I'm sorry. I'm not qualified to answer the heart of your question.

[Braedon Clark, Liberal, Sackville—Bedford—Preston, NS]

I appreciate that.

In your own personal experience, having been a service member for several decades, was this always a number one issue for folks, or has that evolved and changed over time, in your view?

[Nishika Jardine]

I believe it has been an issue for the past five to seven years. We didn't hear about an issue getting family doctors.

I knew from my own personal experience that my family was unable to get a family doctor in the area where I lived. It took several years before my family could get a family doctor, but generally it wasn't something I was personally aware of. Where I've heard about it, of course, is in this job, and it seems to have been exacerbated since COVID.

[Braedon Clark, Liberal, Sackville—Bedford—Preston, NS]

Thank you. I appreciate that.

I think it was Mr. Tolmie who asked questions earlier about how difficult it is to implement the recommendations that you put forward.

When your office is developing recommendations to put forward to the department, what kinds of considerations go into that? Do you consider, for example, what the legal, financial or human resources implications of a recommendation might be? How do they factor into your decision-making on how quickly is reasonable to see a recommendation fulfilled?

You're almost grading them on a curve in some ways. Not all recommendations are created equal in terms of the difficulty of actually executing them.

Could you give us some insight into how you think through that process?

[Nishika Jardine]

The analysts who do this work are very highly educated and very well versed in reading the legislation, regulations and policies and understanding how they all work together in order to deliver a program or a benefit to veterans. The work that goes into the study of the issue, where we've perceived a gap or an unfairness and then making those findings, is at an academic level.

Many of our reports are probably not ones that veterans would enjoy reading, which is why we try to provide an executive summary or a message from me to put it into lay language. The reports we write are aimed at the department. They know we understand at a very deep level what we are talking about and where we have found unfairness, and these reports are credible to them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

Mr. Clark, your time is up.

Thank you very much again for this round.

We are now at our third round. I would like to invite Mrs. Wagantall for five minutes.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Thank you so much, Chair.

It's so good to see you again, Colonel Jardine and Duane. It means a lot to have you here. Thank you for the times when my office has reached out to you to get clarification on things; it has always been accurate and fair. There are very good tools for us to use.

In your notes here, in 2021, you talked about something you wanted to see, and the government apparently wanted to see, but hasn't been implemented. It's something we've discussed a lot at this committee over the last decade. It's the unique impact of military service on the mental health and well-being of not only the veterans but also their family members.

You have been calling for the government to ensure that government-funded mental health treatment would be there for those family members in their own right, regardless of whether the veterans are on a treatment plan. I don't know where to go to get clarity on this. There is no question that when veterans struggle, that impacts their families, which then impacts the veterans. It would help those veterans significantly if their family members were able to get the help they need. I know this has ended up helping them turn it around and get the help they've been waiting a decade for.

What are the barriers to this taking place?

[Nishika Jardine]

This is one that is very near and dear to my heart. When a veteran is receiving mental health treatment that the department is paying for, if the clinician believes that the veteran's well-being will be improved or that their progress or their healing will be improved if their family also has treatment.... It's all focused on the veteran.

I have to give the department credit. It does its very best for families. If it can link it to the veteran's treatment, it does. As soon as there's a family breakdown or a divorce or separation, the spouse and possibly the children are no longer eligible to be part of the veteran's family. If the veteran is not interested in being treated or doesn't want to have their family included, the family doesn't have that access.

When the veteran dies, the family is immediately cut off. It is truly heartbreaking to witness. This happened to me at a town hall. The only thing I could say to this widow is that the law says that it has to be for the veteran. This is legislation. You can't ask the department to break the law, but that is very cold comfort to a widow.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

You want to encourage VAC to explore expanding and obtaining additional authorities to minimize the financial costs around mental health treatment for family members, and this includes expanding access to treatment sessions for some family members.

Is this in conjunction with that, or is it just in a case where the veteran is fine with them having the support or getting the support himself or herself?

[Nishika Jardine]

I know that this requires a legislative change that acknowledges that the family also serves. We say that when the member serves, the family also serves, but to acknowledge this would be to provide Veterans Affairs with the authority to provide mental health treatment for service-related mental health where there's a clear connection to their veteran's service or their member's service. This is a clear allocation of resources for family members when their mental health has been affected by being part of a military family.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

What is the barrier? Why is that not happening when it says that these are things that are important to the government? Why are those policy changes not taking place? What needs to happen?

[Nishika Jardine]

Madam, I would ask you to direct that question to the department.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marie-France Lalonde]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Mrs. Hirtle for five minutes, please.

[Alana Hirtle, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Colonel Jardine and Mr. Schippers, again, for being here. We really appreciate your input today.

Coming back to the “Spotlight” report, I'm struck by the number of recommendations that have been implemented. I see this as an encouraging sign—as I'm sure you do—that governments have listened and sought to action the recommendations of your office.

Of course, I'm aware that there are some recommendations that are outstanding and that there's still more work to do. Can you briefly help us understand how you arrived at these recommendations?

[Nishika Jardine]

Each of those recommendations is as a result of an academic-level, deep study of the issue and findings. Each one is based on a finding of unfairness—unfairness meaning a gap or a barrier in the equitable access to benefits and services provided by the department based on the legislation that Parliament has put in place. That is where each recommendation seeks to resolve a finding of unfairness in the entire legislation, regulation and policy framework of veterans' benefits.

[Alana Hirtle, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

If I could, I'll circle back to my colleague's question regarding items that are no longer tracked. I believe you mentioned that there was a 10-year period after which, if no action had happened, you'd either drop it or do a new report to update it. I think that is the term that you used.

Is that because you see that they're no longer relevant, or is it because of an inability to actually track progress? Can you expand on that a little?

[Nishika Jardine]

It would not be because we can't track the progress. We get a thorough answer from the department on each and every recommendation. If it's no longer tracked, it's simply because it's not relevant.

Did I miss something, Duane?

[Duane Schippers]

The time.

[Nishika Jardine]

Or the time, yes.

I'm grateful to have him here beside me.

[Alana Hirtle, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

The time; that's interesting. Thank you for that.

I'm recognizing that it's your responsibility to assess the work of the department and the Minister of Veterans Affairs, and that the onus is on you and your office to continue to review and identify ways to improve. Do you feel that your efforts are bearing fruit? How do you view the actions undertaken—or not—by the department to act on your recommendations?