• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

SOLD OUT (under New Vets Charter)

Danjanou said:
And the Oscar for best public back peddling by a nonprofit agency trying to cover their *** goes to…


Thats pretty funny yet after that quote they go on to say they were behind the NVC because it was a living charter. IMO that means they supported it. The Legion seems very confused.
From the 'budman's news release - highlights mine:
Today, Canada's Veterans Ombudsman, Guy Parent, released his Report on the New Veterans Charter accompanied by an Actuarial Analysis. The report puts forward evidenced-based recommendations that address shortcomings in three New Veterans Charter program areas: financial, vocational rehabilitation and assistance, and family support. This is the first time that recommendations for improvements to the New Veterans Charter have been supported by an actuarial analysis that pinpoint exactly where the current suite of New Veterans Charter benefits are failing some Veterans today, and will continue to fail them unless changes are made quickly.

“I believe that this report breaks new ground on how we view the New Veterans Charter,” said Mr. Parent. “There are no hypotheses or speculations in my Report, just evidence-based facts and analysis with recommendations. If it is given the consideration that I believe it deserves, it could well be a game changer by serving as the baseline of how the Charter should be evaluated today and in the future.”

Mr. Parent is encouraged that the Honourable Julian Fantino, Minister of Veterans Affairs, agreed to his recommendation for a comprehensive review of the New Veterans Charter, including all enhancements, with special focus placed on the most seriously injured, support for families and the delivery of programs by Veterans Affairs Canada.

Notwithstanding the enhancements brought about by the Enhanced New Veterans Charter Act, Bill C-55, in 2011, Veterans and their families continue to face problems. “I urge the government to use my Report on the New Veterans Charter and its Actuarial Analysis as the blueprint for action for the upcoming parliamentary committee hearings this fall, and to move quickly to address the transition support shortcomings put forth in my report.

“I also urge the government to institute a regular two-year Charter review to demonstrate to Veterans and their families, and to all Canadians, that the parliamentarians who unanimously voted in the New Veterans Charter in 2005 are going to steadfastly stand up for the promise that they made to our Veterans.”

In the last 16 months, the Office of the Veterans Ombudsman has conducted the most comprehensive and intensive research and analysis work that it has undertaken. “In addition, I have personally tested our growing body of recommendations with almost all Veterans' organizations across the country, as well as with other stakeholder groups with an interest in Veterans' issues,” said Mr. Parent. “I have also had multiple working consultations with Veterans and their families and have briefed parliamentarians on my team’s findings."

“The bottom line is this,” said Mr. Parent, “We either deal with these issues now or we are going to have to deal with the human cost later ... when it will cost us much more. Concrete and urgent action is required to implement the recommendations in my Report. Our Veterans deserve no less in return for their service and sacrifice to Canada.”

Here's  link to the report, and its recommendations, as well as the actuarial info:
Financial Support

The Veterans Ombudsman recommends that the Minister of Veterans Affairs improve the New Veterans Charter’s economic financial support benefits provided to Veterans by: 

1.Providing additional financial support after age 65 to eligible totally and permanently incapacitated Veterans to ensure that their monthly benefits are no less than 70 percent of their indexed pre-release salary;
2.Increasing the Earnings Loss Benefit to 90 percent of pre-release salary;
3.Providing the same Earnings Loss Benefit to former part-time Reserve Force members whose injury or illness is related to service;
4.Calculating the annual cost of living adjustment to the Earnings Loss Benefit based on actual annual increases in the cost of living as measured by the Consumer Price Index; and,
5.Providing the Permanent Impairment Allowance and Permanent Impairment Allowance Supplement benefits to all totally and permanently incapacitated Veterans who are in receipt of a Disability Award and an approved rehabilitation plan for the condition that is causing the total and permanent incapacity.

The Veterans Ombudsman recommends that the Minister of Veterans Affairs improve the New Veterans Charter non-economic compensation provided to Veterans by:

1.As a first step, increasing the maximum amount of the Disability Award to the maximum judicial cap for non-pecuniary damages awarded by Canadian courts;
2.Conducting a comprehensive review, including consultations with Veterans’ stakeholders, to determine what the appropriate maximum amount should be to fairly compensate Canadian Forces members and Veterans for pain and suffering resulting from an injury or illness in service to Canada; and,
3.Reviewing the adequacy of the $500 provided for financial counselling.


Vocational Rehabilitation and Assistance Support

The Veterans Ombudsman recommends that the Minister of Veterans Affairs improve vocational rehabilitation and assistance support to Veterans by:
1.Instructing the Department to develop appropriate program measurements to effectively monitor Veterans' progression and success in completing their Individual Vocational Rehabilitation Plan, including subsequent employment;
2.Amending the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Regulations to ensure that all costs associated with post-secondary education are paid;
3.Instructing the Department to amend its policies relating to vocational rehabilitation and assistance to ensure that the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Regulations are liberally interpreted with regard to the cost and duration of an Individual Vocational Rehabilitation Plan;
4.Instructing the Department to amend its policies relating to vocational rehabilitation and assistance to ensure that the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Regulations are liberally interpreted to allow more flexibility for Veterans to acquire new skills and higher education while also taking into consideration the Veteran's aptitude and motivation in the development of an Individual Vocational Rehabilitation Plan;
5.Increasing partnership opportunities to better help Veterans obtain good paying civilian jobs, in collaboration with the Minister of National Defence; and,
6.Undertaking an independent review of the dual SISIP Financial Services and Veterans Affairs Canada income support and vocational rehabilitation programs to determine whether the current construct is effective, in collaboration with the Minister of National Defence.


Family Support

The Veterans Ombudsman recommends that the Minister of Veterans Affairs improve family support to Veterans by:
1.Providing proper counselling, information, communications and outreach to families;
2.Extending access by families to Military Family Resource Centre programs after the medical release of the Canadian Forces member, in collaboration with the Minister of National Defence;
3.Harmonizing Canadian Forces and Veterans Affairs Canada financial assistance provided to families;
4.Developing a caregiver compensation program to compensate the spouse or family member who acts as the primary caregiver to a seriously disabled Veteran;
5.Providing the same access to the Treasury Board Pensioner Dental Service Plan to Veterans and their families as that provided to them by Veterans Affairs Canada under the Public Service Health Care Plan; and,
6.Eliminating the time limit for surviving spouses to apply for vocational rehabilitation and assistance services.
Danjanou said:
And the Oscar for best public back peddling by a nonprofit agency trying to cover their *** goes to…

Funny, that link doesn't work for me now - guess someone's editing?
For a historical compasrion, here is their 2006 annoucement:

Yes it is...................they supported it along with almost every soldier on this site and in the media.

Amazing how conveniently that part is forgotten when it turned to s%#@.
Lightguns said:
For a historical compasrion, here is their 2006 annoucement:

Can't seem to make that one work in my browser, either, so here it is attached in case link doesn't work for you too.
milnews.ca said:
Funny, that link doesn't work for me now - guess someone's editing?

Too bad I copied and pasted the whole thing  >:D

Legion advocacy – Unwavering & Constant

Each and every day The Royal Canadian Legion is working to ensure all Veterans and their families receive the life-long care and benefits they are entitled to. It is not every day that the challenges Veterans face in obtaining these benefits are brought forward in the media, so quite often the work of the Legion goes unnoticed. In the past few days the attention of millions of Canadians has been focused on the efforts of Veterans to bring about changes to government programs that provide Veterans with benefits rightly owed to them resulting from injuries sustained during service to the Nation. More...

•Read the Letter to Veterans Affairs Canada Minister Steven Blaney
•For more on what the Legion does for you, read our Factsheet.
A Reminder of the Legion’s Position on the NVC

The Royal Canadian Legion NEVER fully or unconditionally supported the New Veterans Charter. When the NVC was introduced in 2006, the Legion, as well as other veterans’ organizations, was behind the New Veterans Charter in the beginning because they were told that it was a “living charter” which would be amended as flaws or gaps were identified.

The Legion acknowledges that the NVC was adopted without clause-by-clause review in Parliamentary Committee and in the Senate because of a perceived urgent need to better look after modern Veterans and their families, and to facilitate their transition to civilian life.  The Legion went along with the introduction of the NVC on the basis that it would be a “Living Charter” and improvements would be made when required.

The Legion has been working to make changes to the NVC since it was introduced, including advocating for changes to the lump sum payment. We posted a statement on where the Legion stands on the NVC in September 2010, and we continue to press the government for changes to the Charter. Please see the following links for full details:

Policy Ad #1
Policy Ad #2

The Legion stands for ALL Veterans, and we will continue to support them and advocate on their behalf.

Gee wonder what I'll be bringing up at my Branch meeting this week.  8)

Teager confused is an understatement.

Perhaps its time to look at the organization and it's usefulness. I did attend a branch for a short time but after seeing that I was one of the few that had served I didn't think it was a place I wanted to be associated with.
Branch service officers are quite excellent  I had amazing help from them. I think there is a certain "star struck" behaviour when the provincial and national command hob knob with the cabinet ministers. I like to think that the legion reps were yokels taken in by wining and dining cabinet ministers.

As for universal support, I recall the advice passed around the unit that you should get your claim in before the NVC because no one liked the lump sum idea.

It is still quite academic as there is as yet no changes and a committee could study this for a few years to come. 
Lightguns said:
Branch service officers are quite excellent  I had amazing help from them. I think there is a certain "star struck" behaviour when the provincial and national command hob knob with the cabinet ministers. I like to think that the legion reps were yokels taken in by wining and dining cabinet ministers.

Having met some of the high priced help at Provincial and Dominion conventions I think you're insulting yokels there.  8)

Re service officers some are excellent, others meh. My Branch one is ok and the District one is very motivated and knows his stuff. Both are crusty old Vets though. In between the Zone one is a never served who seems to think his job description is to stand up at meetings (the few he shows up for) and say "no report."  ::)

milnews.ca said:
Now, when the NVC & the 'Budman's recommendations/costings come up in Question Period, the answer will be "we welcome the 'Budman's input as we comprehensively review the NVC".
This from the Minister this afternoon after the release of the report:
.... "I would like to offer my thanks to the Veterans Ombudsman for his ongoing work on this important file," said Minister Fantino. "His reports highlight how the assistance and services delivered through the New Veterans Charter are providing real and meaningful support to Veterans and their families. The recommendations will also serve as an important starting point for the upcoming parliamentary review." ....

I'm shocked, SHOCKED .....

My  :2c: - post review, we'll only see changes that cost little or no bucks.  Big $ needed for change = ain't happening.  I'll be glad to be proven wrong.
Nemo888 said:
The main reason for the NVC was money though. Bean counters where nosing around Ottawa saying the cost of supporting veterans would be greater than prosecuting the war and that this was unacceptable.
Was it "bean counters" in '05 or the Legion in '06?
PPCLI Guy said:
In 06, the government was nowhere near as obsessive about spending - indeed they were quite profligate.  I think it likely that saving money was not the defining factor in the decision to adopt the NVC....
E.R. Campbell said:
.... be aware: a fair system will be tough to get past Finance and the Treasury Board.
SO true.

And a reminder of how at least some in TB felt in 2010 when Pat Stogran was the Vets 'Budman ....
.... Col. Stogran said the root of the problem is that Veterans Affairs bureaucrats are keeping political ministers in the dark about the scope of the problems facing returning soldiers and are refusing to push for more money from powerful central departments like Treasury Board and the Privy Council Office .... "I was told by a senior Treasury Board analyst, who shall remain nameless, that it is in the government's best interest to have soldiers killed overseas rather than wounded because the liability is shorter term." ....
On one hand the Minister wants to review the charter, while on the other hand his government is appealing recent BC Court allowing the class action lawsuit to go forward:


I think that Fantino will allow some tinkering around the margins, however, lump sum payments are nonnegotiable in the minds of this government. In my view, the lifetime payments vs lump sum awards are the central issue with the New Veterans Charter.

The government is not going to change their opinion unless they are forced to by either a court ruling or public opinion. The former be dragged through the courts for years, while the latter option could possibly be implemented as early as the next election! Make this an issue with serving MPs and potential candidates for your federal ridings.
See att PDF which indicates the Vet organizations who are a party to this.


Government's Failure to Implement Plan of Action on Reforming New Veterans Charter Violates Social Covenant Owed to Canadian Veterans and Their Families

OTTAWA, Oct. 3, 2013 /CNW/ - The National Council of Veteran Associations, consisting of sixty member organizations and representing a wide cross-section of the veterans' community, came out today in support of the essential findings of the Veterans Ombudsman's Office, which issued a comprehensive report this week in relation to the need to reform the New Veterans Charter.

Brian Forbes, Chairman of NCVA, noted that the report, which calls for urgent action, correctly recognizes the appropriate priorities for immediate revision of the Charter in its focus on three key transition issues:

- the financial instability and decreased standard of living caused by reduced post military release income and insufficient financial support after the age of 65 for totally and permanently incapacitated veterans.

- the limitations in vocational rehabilitation and educational funding which can affect second career aspirations and employment options.

- inadequate support to address difficult family environment scenarios as a consequence of military service.

"The Ombudsman's evidence-based actuarial study has demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt the specific shortcomings that exist in the Charter today," Mr. Forbes said.

He pointed out that when the Charter was enacted in 2006, the Government declared that this legislation was a "Living Charter" and made a formal commitment to the veterans' community that, as gaps and inequities were identified, immediate remedial action would be taken to address these deficiencies.

"The Government has failed to fulfill this commitment with regard to a significant number of substantive issues, impacting on the compensation benefits of disabled veterans in violation of the social covenant that the Canadian people owe to our veterans and their families," he said.

NCVA has consistently demanded over the last number of years that Veterans Affairs Canada implement an overall plan of action to fulfill its commitment in relation to not only the New Veterans Charter, but also to seriously disabled veterans and health care reform.

"In accordance with the fundamental conclusions of the Veterans Ombudsman's report, it remains NCVA's position that, notwithstanding the ostensible economic constraints facing the country, the seriously disabled veteran should be given immediate priority in the implementation of the first phase of a VAC plan of action for legislative reform," Mr. Forbes said.  "There is no higher obligation on Veterans Affairs Canada and the veterans' community than the responsibility to address the needs and requirements of seriously disabled veterans and their families."

He added that, although NCVA fully endorses the general thrust of the Ombudsman's report, it would have preferred that the Ombudsman's office had adopted the more beneficial recommendations of the New Veterans Charter Advisory Group and the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs (2009-2010) in relation to strengthening the compensation and income security provisions of the Charter.

It has been NCVA's longstanding contention that any VAC plan of action should include the remedial measures contained in the Advisory Group and Parliamentary Committee reports (see Appendix I) so as to optimally address the deficiencies in the Charter as precisely identified by the Veterans Ombudsman's report.

In NCVA's view, immediate implementation of a comprehensive course of action to legislative Charter reform pursuant to these recommendations would represent an important step to meeting the controversy surrounding the Lump Sum Disability Award through the proposed enhancements of the complementary benefit and income support programs in the current legislation.

"We have encouraged the new Minister, Mr. Fantino, and his predecessors, to 'get out in front' of the significant criticism of the Charter with such a plan of action, and not wait for the outcome of the current class action lawsuit (Equitas), and the pending Parliamentary Standing Committee review anticipated this fall," Mr. Forbes said.

"We do commend the Minister for his immediate commitment upon receipt of the Ombudsman's report, to the initiation of a review of the New Veterans Charter, with particular emphasis on 'the most seriously injured, support for families, and the delivery of programs by VAC,'" he added, "However, in our judgement, these proposed reforms have been sufficiently studied and analyzed over the last number of years such that the gaps and voids have been readily identified by the New Veterans Charter Advisory Group, the Special Needs Advisory Group, the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs, and now the Veterans Ombudsman's office."

"In our considered opinion, it is long overdue for VAC to become proactive, and implement remedial legislation to address these well established concerns and live up to its obligation under the social covenant to Canada's veterans and their dependants.  For a Government that professes to support our military, the lack of substantive action to reform the New Veterans Charter is truly unacceptable, and represents a betrayal of the Government's commitment to the veterans' community," he said.



    the Earnings Loss Benefit should be increased to 100% of pre-release income and in relation to permanently incapacitated veterans, be paid for life (not terminated at 65 as is currently the case).  In addition, the projected career earnings of a Canadian Armed Forces member should be employed as the standard for the payment of the Earnings Loss Benefit.  In this context, VAC should adopt the approach utilized by the Canadian Courts in assessing the concept of "future loss of income" which specifically addresses the projected lifetime earnings loss in a personal injury claim.

    the SISIP (Service Income Security Insurance Plan) Long Term Disability Program should be eliminated with respect to service related disabilities to eradicate the insurance culture constraints presently contained in the New Veterans Charter.  It is to be noted that, at the time of the enactment of the New Veterans Charter, VAC committed that, as a fundamental pre-condition to the passage of the legislation that the SISIP program would be eliminated as soon as possible so as to remove the restrictions that were inherent to the overall income replacement program.

    the restrictions and complexities of the Permanent Impairment Allowance guidelines should be addressed so as to allow greater numbers of disabled veterans to qualify for appropriate levels of entitlement for this important allowance.

    the Lump Sum Disability Award should be increased commensurate with the general damages paid by the Canadian Courts.  At this point in time, the differential would be approximately $50,000.00, and it remains the view of NCVA that there is no justification for a lower amount being paid to a disabled veteran who is severely injured in the service of his country.

    the Exceptional Incapacity Allowance concept founded under the Pension Act should be incorporated into the New Veterans Charter.  This allowance has traditionally addressed the impact of the disabilities suffered by 100% veteran pensioners with reference to their difficulty to cope with their overall incapacity.  The introduction of EIA to the New Veterans Charter would augment the limitations of the Permanent Impairment Allowance, particularly in the circumstance where a disabled veteran confronts the ravages of age.

    educational benefits should be expanded to bolster the rehabilitation provisions of the Charter so as to address the vocational and occupational constraints faced by many returning veterans with service related disabilities.

    the discrimination that currently exists with reference to specific classes of reservists, particularly those that are seriously disabled, should be eliminated in the New Veterans Charter and related insurance coverage with particular regard to income replacement programs and relevant SISIP provisions.

    In order to recognize the care giving requirements that many disabled veterans confront to cope with their incapacities, the Attendance Allowance provisions of the Pension Act should be added to the New Veterans Charter in recognition of the financial costs faced by many families in this context.

    the Charter should acknowledge that veterans with dependants should receive a higher level of compensation either through the augmentation of the Lump Sum Disability Award or an increase in the Earnings Loss Benefit for such veterans and their families.

[Underlining reflects the more beneficial proposals supported by the New Veterans Charter Advisory Group, the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs and the National Council of Veteran Associations as distinct from the recommendations set out in the new Veterans Ombudsman's report.]

SOURCE National Council of Veteran Associations in Canada
For further information:

The Recommendations of the New Veterans Charter Advisory Group, the Parliamentary Committee Report and the National Council of Veteran Associations follow in Appendix I.  For more information, please contact Communications at 1-877-60MEDIA, visit ncva-cnaac.ca or e-mail ncva@waramps.ca.
Sounds like the minister is continuing to use that decision making ability so well developed in Caledonia during his time as OPP top cop. Of course there is a lack of innocent by standers to arrest this time.
From the Vets 'Budman on Earnings Loss Benefit:  why is it settled under SISISP, but not under NVC?
Many of you have contacted my Office recently concerning Earnings Loss Benefit for Veterans who are under the New Veterans Charter. I know from your calls that some of you think that my office has not been pursuing this issue with enough vigour, so let me tell you what we have done.


my team and I have never stopped pursuing this issue on your behalf with Veterans Affairs Canada. In fact, we have emphasized the need to address the issue on many occasions. Particularly, we have emphasized the importance for the Department to keep you in the loop about what it intends to do concerning Earnings Loss Benefit harmonization for New Veterans Charter Veterans.

I believe that it is only fair for Veterans Affairs Canada to be upfront with you on this matter. You need to know if the answer is ‘yes’ or ‘no’. If it is ‘no’, why is it ‘no’ for Veterans under the New Veterans Charter, but not for Veterans under SISIP LTD?


The week before Veterans’ Week, I spoke about this matter with Minister Fantino. I thank the Minister for taking the time to listen to my concern on your behalf. I want you to know that I am following up with his officials to ensure that your position is understood and that your voice is heard.

In the interest of fairness, this issue needs to be resolved quickly...and it needs to be resolved in your favour ....
From the Info-machine ....
The Honourable Julian Fantino, Minister of Veterans Affairs, today made his inaugural appearance before the House of Commons’ Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs since his appointment as Minister in July. Before committee, Minister Fantino reiterated the Government’s support for a comprehensive review of the New Veterans Charter, including all the enhancements that have been made to it to date, with a special focus placed on the most seriously injured, support for families and the delivery of programs by Veterans Affairs Canada.

During his appearance, the Minister asked the Committee to consult with Veterans and other key stakeholders on options for how the New Veterans Charter could clearly define and demonstrate the Government of Canada’s relationship with Canadian Veterans.


The comprehensive review of the New Veterans Charter, by legislators and with input from Veterans, their family members, public officials, the Veterans Ombudsman and the Veterans stakeholder community, serves as a key forum to find responsible changes to improve the already robust systems of support in place to help Canada’s Veterans ....
.... and from CBC.ca
Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino has asked a House of Commons committee to spell out precisely what kind of social and legal obligation Canada has to its soldiers.

The issue is at the heart of a class-action lawsuit underway in B.C., where veterans of the Afghan war say they are being discriminated against by Ottawa's new benefits system.

The Conservatives, who bill themselves as champions of Canadian soldiers, faced intense criticism last summer when federal lawyers filed their defence in the court case.

Justice Department attorneys argued Canada has no extraordinary obligation to care for wounded and broken veterans, despite pledges of previous governments dating back to the First World War.

Fantino wants MPs to define what Canada's shared duty and responsibility should be for possible inclusion in the veterans charter ....
"The work our Government does each day to serve Canadian Veterans can be called many things: duty, responsibility, commitment, social contract, sacred obligation or covenant. It is all of those things," said Minister Fantino. "Our Government is committed to ensuring that we give Canada's Veterans the clarity they have asked for. As part of the comprehensive review, I have asked the Committee to determine how best we can state our commitment to Canada's Veterans, and what is the best format for doing so."


Seems pretty clear to me. I guess the government needs more clarity on the clarity.
Isn't it nice. They will study it again: how many years will this one take?