(Return tabled) Question No. 864 Ms. Kirsty Duncan: With respect to mental health and suicide in the Canadian Forces (CF), including regular forces, reservists and veterans, as well as among Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) veterans: (a) what does history and research show from the First World War (WWI) and the Second World War (WWII), regarding the percentage of Canadian veterans who suffered some degree of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and how it might have impacted their ability to (i) hold down jobs, (ii) maintain relationships, (iii) overcome substance abuse, (iv) maintain their will to live; (b) how are suicides tracked for CF regular forces, reservists and veterans, including RCMP veterans, (i) has the tracking method ch ...[+++]anged over time (from 2000 onwards) for any of these groups, including name changes (e.g., suicide versus sudden death) and, if so, how, why and when, (ii) how are suicides tracked among veterans who may not be known to Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) and who may be under other types of care (e.g., in hospitals) or in homeless shelters, prisons, etc.; (c) what are the identified gaps in tracking for each of the identified groups and, for each gap, what action items (i) are planned (including predicted start and completion dates, and necessary funding), (ii) are being implemented (including predicted completion date and necessary funding), (iii) have been completed to address the problem; (d) how are suicides investigated for each identified group today and, for each group, for the years 1990 to the present (or years available), (i) what percentage of victims were known to either the Department of National Defense (DND) or VAC prior to the suicide, or to the medical, social-aid or prison system, (ii) what percentage had attempted suicide before, (iii) what percentage suffered from an identified Operational Stress Injury (OSI), including PTSD, anxiety, depression or substance abuse, (iv) what percentage suffered from acquired brain ...

I am very proud of the amendment by my colleague from British Columbia Southern Interior who succeeded in getting a bi-annual review of the legislation.

From my understanding, it is an improvement, but let's say a card expires immediately after the biannual review that's done by the department.

82. Takes note of the first biennial review of the EU Guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict under the UK Presidency; is pleased to note, in particular, that the EU's human rights fact sheets, adopted in July 2005, contain a section on children's rights and a specific requirement to report under these Guidelines where appropriate; notes that the consultation with stakeholders and NGOs has been exemplary in the process of drafting the review and recommendations; regrets, however, that the European Parliament was not involved in the process of evaluation of these Guidelines, that the opportunity for a wide-ranging review was not seiz ...[+++]ed and that the outcome document was disappointing in its scope and ambition; therefore requests the Council systematically to associate the European Parliament in the biennial review of these Guidelines, so that it may be aware of Parliament's position and recommendations in this field;

82. Takes note of the first biennial review of the EU Guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict under the UK Presidency; is pleased to note, in particular, that the EU's human rights fact sheets, adopted in July 2005, contain a section on children's rights and a specific requirement to report under these Guidelines where appropriate; notes that the consultation with stakeholders and NGOs has been exemplary in the process of drafting the review and recommendations; regrets, however, that the European Parliament was not involved in the process of evaluation of these Guidelines, that the opportunity for a wide-ranging review was not seiz ...[+++]ed and that the outcome document was disappointing in its scope and ambition; therefore requests the Council systematically to associate the European Parliament in the biennial review of these Guidelines, so that it may be aware of Parliament's position and recommendations in this field;

81. Takes note of the first biennial review of the EU Guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict under the UK Presidency; welcomes in particular that the EU's human rights fact sheets, adopted in July 2005, contain a section on children's rights and a specific requirement to report under these Guidelines where appropriate; notes that the consultation with stakeholders and NGOs has been exemplary in the process of drafting the review and recommendations; regrets, however, that the European Parliament was not involved in the process of evaluation of these Guidelines, that the opportunity for a wide-ranging review was not seized and that ...[+++]the outcome document was disappointing in its scope and ambition; therefore requests the Council systematically to associate the European Parliament in the biennial review of these Guidelines, so as to be aware of the Parliament's position and recommendations in this field;