QPQ Mulcair on the closure of Veterans Affairs offices
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTJm7rnaVxg
Regards,
The Canadian Veterans Advocacy Team.
http://canadianveteransadvocacy.com/Board2/index.php
Thursday, October 17, 2013
New announcement: PRESS RELEASE: Canadian Veterans Adovocacy - Throne Speech, 2013
OTTAWA. Today saw yet another Conservative Government Throne Speech filled with headlines without substance for Canadian most seriously wounded veterans. The theme "Security and Prosperity in an Uncertain World" is particularly poignant as the nation prepares for Remembrance Week and on November 11th, to honour the sacrifice of the fallen.
Lest we Forget as Remembrance Day approaches, that 150 Canadians died in Afghanistan under the Harper Government's stewardship of the War in Afghanistan.
Lest we forget that over fifteen hundred valiant Canadians have returned to our communities bereft of limbs, catastrophically wounded of mind and soul as this nation once more was blooded providing security in an Uncertain World.
Lest we forget the Sacred Obligation this nation has to those who stood, and stand on guard for thee.
"Canada's most seriously wounded veterans, definitively identified by Veterans Ombudsman Parent as the primary victims of the New Veterans Charter, can only be dismayed at the Throne Speech's lack of focus on the Veterans portfolio," said Michael L Blais CD, President and founder of the Canadian Veterans Advocacy. "Once again, veterans who have sacrificed the greatest will be abandoned. Once again, the nation's most seriously wounded warriors will be forsaken simply because the Harper Government has refused to embrace it's Sacred Obligation."
Where is the increased support for Canada's most seriously wounded identified by Veterans Ombudsman Parent's report under the enhanced Charter?
How can this government claim they have provided dignified burials for impoverished veterans when they, during the last legislative review, retained the same restrictive financial criteria resulting in a 67 percent denial rate of applicants? How many have been denied since?
Red tape? Closing of nine VAC district offices across the land, mass layoffs of dedicated civil servants who spent their careers catering to the special needs of war and peace shattered veterans, contracting out services to Service Canada, already ravaged by budget related cutbacks and incapable of responding to the need? Asking WW2 and Korean veterans to go to the website is not the answer, asking PTSD afflicted veterans to use a phone app is not the answer. Comprehensive service is.
The traditions of this nation are to be cherished and the inclusion of all veterans, who served in all eras, on the National War Memorial is an admirable move forward. Yet we must be mindful at all times of the sacrifice that the National War Memorial represents, that there must be equality for all veterans who have paid the ultimate sacrifice, the families and disabled veterans, an equality that does not exist as a direct consequence of the New Veterans Charter and the governments refusal to resolve the substantive issues.
One Veteran, One Standard
For additional information, contact...
Michael L Blais CD
Founder/President, Canadian Veterans Advocacy
6618 Harper Drive, Niagara Falls, Ont, Cda.
L2E 7K6 // 905-357-3306 // Cell 905-359-9247
To unsubscribe from these announcements, login to the forum and uncheck "Receive forum announcements and important notifications by email." in your profile.
You can view the full announcement by following this link:
http://canadianveteransadvocacy.com/Board2/index.php?topic=11500.0
Regards,
The Canadian Veterans Advocacy Team.
New announcement: Veterans groups dismiss war memorial rededication as ‘fluff’
Veterans groups dismiss war memorial rededication as 'fluff'
By Robert Sibley, OTTAWA CITIZEN October 16, 2013 11:56 PM
"Fluff." That, in a word, pretty much sums up the response of veterans' groups to the Conservatives' throne speech announcement that the government intends to rededicate the National War Memorial to honour those who've fallen in the service of the country.
"It's important that veterans be recognized, yes, but the Conservatives are just wrapping themselves in the flag," said Michael Blais, president of Canadian Veterans Advocacy. "It's headlines without substance, to make themselves look good."
On Wednesday, toward the end of his hour-long throne speech, Gov. Gen. David Johnston announced that as part of events next year commemorating the centennial of the First World War and the 75th anniversary of the Second World War, the government was "rededicating the National War Memorial to the memory of all men and women who fought for our country."
The government also intends to mark the end of Canada's decade-long mission in Afghanistan by honouring those in uniform who "made the ultimate sacrifice combating the spread of terrorism," as well as promote "the proud history of our Canadian Armed Forces by restoring military traditions."
Gordon Jenkins, president of the NATO Veterans Organization of Canada, said it's fine to honour the dead of past wars, but it's the still-living veterans who need the government's attention. "What are they doing for the living? We're not getting anything for veterans (in the throne speech) except lip service."
He and Blais observed that the government boasts of its dedication to Canadian military history and its willingness to spend hundreds of thousands to mark the 200th anniversary of the War of 1812. But, they said, such actions haven't translated into serving veterans well.
"They're going to spend millions on remembering (the First World War)," said Jenkins. "These are the dead, and let's give them respect, but is this what Veterans Affairs is now? The war memorial doesn't need rededicating. We need something substantive."
Such criticism echoes a recent report from Veterans Ombudsman Guy Parent, who chastised the Tory government for shortfalls in the level of financial support given to veterans, particularly those severely wounded or disabled. "It is simply not acceptable to let veterans who have sacrificed the most for their country ... live their lives with unmet financial needs," the ombudsman said in a study that compared the old system of compensating veterans under the Pension Act with the inadequacies of the new Veterans Charter, legislation backed by the Conservative government when enacted in 2006.
A spokesman for Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino defended the department's record.
"Our Government has made enormous and substantial investments to support Canada's Veterans, including nearly five billion in additional funds towards assistance and services for Veterans and their families," said Joshua Zanin in an email. "As committed in the Speech From the Throne, we will continue to act further to support vulnerable and homeless Veterans and to ensure the successful transition of Veterans into civilian life after their service in uniform."
Veterans were upset earlier this summer after federal lawyers urged a B.C. judge to dismiss a class-action lawsuit filed by injured Afghan veterans, claiming the government has no extraordinary social obligation toward veterans, and owes them nothing more than what they received under the Veterans Charter.
Add this attitude to defence funding issues — including, for example, delays in a $10-million program to replace the aging Lee Enfield rifles used by the Arctic Rangers — and critics like Jenkins and Blais say it's hard to take seriously the government's claim of commitment to the military and its veterans.
"Commemoration is fine," said Blais. "We have an obligation to the fallen. But we also have an obligation to those who are suffering today.
"We've got a government that likes to fly the flag, but look what they are actually doing. It's all fluff. It's not in response to the real needs of veterans."
rsibley@ottawacitizen.com">rsibley@ottawacitizen.com
twitter.com/robert_sibley
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
To unsubscribe from these announcements, login to the forum and uncheck "Receive forum announcements and important notifications by email." in your profile.
You can view the full announcement by following this link:
http://canadianveteransadvocacy.com/Board2/index.php?topic=11498.0
Regards,
The Canadian Veterans Advocacy Team.
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
New announcement: Can We Trust a Veterans Affairs Minister That Doesn't Even Know Who a Veteran Is
Can We Trust a Veterans Affairs Minister That Doesn't Even Know Who a Veteran Is?
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/jeff-rosemartland/canada-veterans-affairs_b_4103494.html
Posted: 10/16/2013 2:43 pm
Newly-minted Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino hasn't exactly been winning friends recently. Nor his influence on veterans been inspirational, except in the way that an emetic inspires. It appears the Honourable Minister is in over his head with his portfolio... or perhaps gagging on it... as mere months after his appointment -- and before he has even taken his seat -- veterans are demanding his resignation. Fantino has been handling the issues at Veterans Affairs with all the grace of a newborn moose on ice skates.
First up: the Government's appeal of the Lump-Sum Lawsuit.
This is hardly Fantino's fault -- the case, legal arguments, and probably the decisions to appeal, preceded his appointment. But he's the guy charged with defending to Canadians the decision to waste even more of our money fighting our veterans in court. Trying to explain away the inexplicable position of his government, Fantino maintains the party line that veterans' issues should be settled in the Commons while simultaneously arguing that the Harper Government isn't bound be decisions of previous ones. The Legion calls the government's position 'reprehensible', taxpayers are backing the veterans, and Fantino is now the focus of the anger.
Next issue: the closures of VAC offices.
This also predates Fantino's appointment. The Harper Government has decided to trim its spending by closing Veterans Affairs offices in such remote locations as Corner Brook (NL), Charlottetown, Sydney (NS), Saskatoon and Windsor, Ontario. This decision has veterans and civil servants united to save their local office, where a veteran can go and receive help in person. Instead, the federal government -- in the person of Julian Fantino -- is promoting the new Veterans Affairs smart-phone app.
The impact on veterans is easily predictable.
But what really has veterans riled are Fantino's comments on Vancouver's CKNW radio earlier this month.
In an interview with Bill Good, the Honourable Minister demonstrated some fundamental ignorance of his stakeholders:
"I spent 40 years in law enforcement. I too have served. I've been at the trenches and heard the guns go off. I guess I can also put myself and other colleagues, firefighters, and police officers who put themselves in harms way every day in the same category."
If you'd been listening attentively, you might have heard the vast cry of obscenities as people nationwide discovered that the Minister Responsible doesn't understand what makes a veteran a veteran.
That is not to take away from the dedication and sacrifices of civilian police, firefighters, or other first responders. All Canadians, including veterans, recognize the amazing - sometimes heroic - contributions made by these fine individuals as they protect and save people and communities. They do fantastic work and should be commended for it. But that's not the point. The point is that they are not veterans.
Minister Fantino obviously was a dedicated career police officer. I'm sure he did witness some horrible things. And if he says he heard gunfire, who am I to say otherwise? (Although I suspect he was being metaphorical in at least one claim. The last time I checked, police didn't engage in trench warfare, not even with very bad gang situations.) But the fact is, the Honourable Minister is not a veteran, does not qualify as a veteran, and, no matter how big his sacrifices, could never be considered a veteran, because of one simple fact:
Julian Fantino did not agree to be ordered to die.
It is that fact which separates civilian services from military and paramilitary organizations like the Canadian Forces and RCMP. It is known as 'unlimited liability' and means that, as a serving member, you agree to follow orders even if that order is to die. As in: Go throw yourself on that grenade! Refusal to do so can, and likely will, result in jail time. Civilian services are not under such constraints. That is what makes them not-veterans.
Which isn't to say that a first-responder wouldn't make such a sacrifice. We see them do risky, death-defying things all the time, sometimes even sacrificing their lives for others. But the point is that they are not required by law to do so. They might be asked to, they might volunteer to, they might feel compelled by circumstance, but they are not under threat of prison for refusing. The Forces and RCMP are.
That is what makes them veterans, and Minister Fantino, not...
Unless they are planning on seriously revising VAC to include anyone who sacrifices and endures hardship for the public good. If that is the new definition, then VAC better hire more staff, because there's a whole lot of civilians who are injured and killed while executing their jobs. Not just first responders: doctors and nurses attacked by patients or contracting illnesses they are treating; game wardens accidentally shot during hunting season; snow removal drivers killed in accidents... how many does Fantino intend to include in this new definition?
Obviously, the Minister didn't intend that every person who dies or is injured in service to the public is a veteran. But what he did was imply that injury or death is required for one to be considered a veteran. That may be a convenient definition for a government intent on saving money on the back of our veterans, but it's a silly notion for nation that requires a military. By the Fantino definition, someone might serve 20 years in the Forces, receive many medals, but, because they escaped injury, they are not a veteran. He can't have meant that, can he?
Who knows what he meant. In a few sentences, the Minister muddied the waters so much that only one thing was clear: Fantino, the Minister of Veterans Affairs, doesn't know who a veteran is.
Which prompted Canada's veterans to call for his resignation.
In case you are still confused (many are, now), here is how you become a veteran: You enlist in the Forces or RCMP; sometimes other groups like the Merchant Marines, or perhaps more in the future. Upon enlisting, you take an oath of service. That oath means you agree to go where you are sent and do as you are told, even if that means dying. Failure to comply means dismissal, disgrace, and probably prison -- not too long ago, it could mean execution. Your sacrifice begins immediately: you give up your free will to your country.
You are now a veteran: if you get run over on your way home from taking the oath and are incapacitated for life, your benefits will come from Veterans Affairs. Even if you did not get the opportunity to do anything, you still made the commitment. They also Serve who only stand and wait, Minister Fantino. A veteran is one who took an oath to die if ordered or be severely punished for refusing.
There's another way of putting this. This definition is used by many veterans:
A veteran - whether regular or reserve, active or retired - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a blank cheque made payable to "the Government of Canada," for an amount of "Up to and including his life."
In fact, that definition is even used by the Office of the Veterans Ombudsman:
We ask of everyone who puts on the uniform in defence of our country to be ready to pay the ultimate sacrifice. In recognition of that bond, they write a blank cheque to the people of Canada up to and including their lives.
But perhaps the Minister wishes to change that perception. After all, it's cheaper to focus only on the injuries -- which the veterans themselves must prove -- than to honour the sacred covenant. We citizens of Canada agreed to look after those who served us. They sign that blank cheque to us; we agree to provide for them, with the same conditions. This is something else Julian Fantino doesn't understand. In the same interview, he stated, "I don't have a blank cheque, and neither do Canadians, to do everything that people want."
Sorry Minister, it doesn't work that way. Unlimited liability means unlimited responsibility. If Canada can't provide for its veterans, then we are not entitled to create any. In which case, your Government shouldn't be boarding up Veterans Affairs offices -- it should shut down recruiting stations.
To unsubscribe from these announcements, login to the forum and uncheck "Receive forum announcements and important notifications by email." in your profile.
You can view the full announcement by following this link:
http://canadianveteransadvocacy.com/Board2/index.php?topic=11494.0
Regards,
The Canadian Veterans Advocacy Team.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/jeff-rosemartland/canada-veterans-affairs_b_4103494.html
Posted: 10/16/2013 2:43 pm
Newly-minted Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino hasn't exactly been winning friends recently. Nor his influence on veterans been inspirational, except in the way that an emetic inspires. It appears the Honourable Minister is in over his head with his portfolio... or perhaps gagging on it... as mere months after his appointment -- and before he has even taken his seat -- veterans are demanding his resignation. Fantino has been handling the issues at Veterans Affairs with all the grace of a newborn moose on ice skates.
First up: the Government's appeal of the Lump-Sum Lawsuit.
This is hardly Fantino's fault -- the case, legal arguments, and probably the decisions to appeal, preceded his appointment. But he's the guy charged with defending to Canadians the decision to waste even more of our money fighting our veterans in court. Trying to explain away the inexplicable position of his government, Fantino maintains the party line that veterans' issues should be settled in the Commons while simultaneously arguing that the Harper Government isn't bound be decisions of previous ones. The Legion calls the government's position 'reprehensible', taxpayers are backing the veterans, and Fantino is now the focus of the anger.
Next issue: the closures of VAC offices.
This also predates Fantino's appointment. The Harper Government has decided to trim its spending by closing Veterans Affairs offices in such remote locations as Corner Brook (NL), Charlottetown, Sydney (NS), Saskatoon and Windsor, Ontario. This decision has veterans and civil servants united to save their local office, where a veteran can go and receive help in person. Instead, the federal government -- in the person of Julian Fantino -- is promoting the new Veterans Affairs smart-phone app.
The impact on veterans is easily predictable.
But what really has veterans riled are Fantino's comments on Vancouver's CKNW radio earlier this month.
In an interview with Bill Good, the Honourable Minister demonstrated some fundamental ignorance of his stakeholders:
"I spent 40 years in law enforcement. I too have served. I've been at the trenches and heard the guns go off. I guess I can also put myself and other colleagues, firefighters, and police officers who put themselves in harms way every day in the same category."
If you'd been listening attentively, you might have heard the vast cry of obscenities as people nationwide discovered that the Minister Responsible doesn't understand what makes a veteran a veteran.
That is not to take away from the dedication and sacrifices of civilian police, firefighters, or other first responders. All Canadians, including veterans, recognize the amazing - sometimes heroic - contributions made by these fine individuals as they protect and save people and communities. They do fantastic work and should be commended for it. But that's not the point. The point is that they are not veterans.
Minister Fantino obviously was a dedicated career police officer. I'm sure he did witness some horrible things. And if he says he heard gunfire, who am I to say otherwise? (Although I suspect he was being metaphorical in at least one claim. The last time I checked, police didn't engage in trench warfare, not even with very bad gang situations.) But the fact is, the Honourable Minister is not a veteran, does not qualify as a veteran, and, no matter how big his sacrifices, could never be considered a veteran, because of one simple fact:
Julian Fantino did not agree to be ordered to die.
It is that fact which separates civilian services from military and paramilitary organizations like the Canadian Forces and RCMP. It is known as 'unlimited liability' and means that, as a serving member, you agree to follow orders even if that order is to die. As in: Go throw yourself on that grenade! Refusal to do so can, and likely will, result in jail time. Civilian services are not under such constraints. That is what makes them not-veterans.
Which isn't to say that a first-responder wouldn't make such a sacrifice. We see them do risky, death-defying things all the time, sometimes even sacrificing their lives for others. But the point is that they are not required by law to do so. They might be asked to, they might volunteer to, they might feel compelled by circumstance, but they are not under threat of prison for refusing. The Forces and RCMP are.
That is what makes them veterans, and Minister Fantino, not...
Unless they are planning on seriously revising VAC to include anyone who sacrifices and endures hardship for the public good. If that is the new definition, then VAC better hire more staff, because there's a whole lot of civilians who are injured and killed while executing their jobs. Not just first responders: doctors and nurses attacked by patients or contracting illnesses they are treating; game wardens accidentally shot during hunting season; snow removal drivers killed in accidents... how many does Fantino intend to include in this new definition?
Obviously, the Minister didn't intend that every person who dies or is injured in service to the public is a veteran. But what he did was imply that injury or death is required for one to be considered a veteran. That may be a convenient definition for a government intent on saving money on the back of our veterans, but it's a silly notion for nation that requires a military. By the Fantino definition, someone might serve 20 years in the Forces, receive many medals, but, because they escaped injury, they are not a veteran. He can't have meant that, can he?
Who knows what he meant. In a few sentences, the Minister muddied the waters so much that only one thing was clear: Fantino, the Minister of Veterans Affairs, doesn't know who a veteran is.
Which prompted Canada's veterans to call for his resignation.
In case you are still confused (many are, now), here is how you become a veteran: You enlist in the Forces or RCMP; sometimes other groups like the Merchant Marines, or perhaps more in the future. Upon enlisting, you take an oath of service. That oath means you agree to go where you are sent and do as you are told, even if that means dying. Failure to comply means dismissal, disgrace, and probably prison -- not too long ago, it could mean execution. Your sacrifice begins immediately: you give up your free will to your country.
You are now a veteran: if you get run over on your way home from taking the oath and are incapacitated for life, your benefits will come from Veterans Affairs. Even if you did not get the opportunity to do anything, you still made the commitment. They also Serve who only stand and wait, Minister Fantino. A veteran is one who took an oath to die if ordered or be severely punished for refusing.
There's another way of putting this. This definition is used by many veterans:
A veteran - whether regular or reserve, active or retired - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a blank cheque made payable to "the Government of Canada," for an amount of "Up to and including his life."
In fact, that definition is even used by the Office of the Veterans Ombudsman:
We ask of everyone who puts on the uniform in defence of our country to be ready to pay the ultimate sacrifice. In recognition of that bond, they write a blank cheque to the people of Canada up to and including their lives.
But perhaps the Minister wishes to change that perception. After all, it's cheaper to focus only on the injuries -- which the veterans themselves must prove -- than to honour the sacred covenant. We citizens of Canada agreed to look after those who served us. They sign that blank cheque to us; we agree to provide for them, with the same conditions. This is something else Julian Fantino doesn't understand. In the same interview, he stated, "I don't have a blank cheque, and neither do Canadians, to do everything that people want."
Sorry Minister, it doesn't work that way. Unlimited liability means unlimited responsibility. If Canada can't provide for its veterans, then we are not entitled to create any. In which case, your Government shouldn't be boarding up Veterans Affairs offices -- it should shut down recruiting stations.
To unsubscribe from these announcements, login to the forum and uncheck "Receive forum announcements and important notifications by email." in your profile.
You can view the full announcement by following this link:
http://canadianveteransadvocacy.com/Board2/index.php?topic=11494.0
Regards,
The Canadian Veterans Advocacy Team.
Monday, October 14, 2013
New announcement: New Veterans Affairs minister: same old crisis of insensitivity
New Veterans Affairs minister: same old crisis of insensitivity
New Veterans Affairs minister: same old crisis of insensitivity
By SEAN BRUYEA | Published: Monday, 10/14/2013 12:00 am EDT
OTTAWA—Veterans aren't happy and recently-appointed Veterans Affair Minister Julian Fantino is only fanning the fire with the usual parroting of bureaucratic misinformation. How do veterans and other Canadians hold a minister and his bureaucracy accountable for spreading half-truths and misleading claims?
The first step to accountability is to uncover the truth.
The situation in the veteran community is so dire that Fantino wrote an op-ed for theNational Post and also sent it out on the internet addressed to "Dear Veteran." His open letter claims there is a "tangle of misinformation regarding how Canada treats" its veterans. His first assertion is that "a majority of Canada's veterans receive the support and care they need."
The truth is Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) provides programs to a mere 17 per cent of Canada's serving and retired military members. It would be impossible for Fantino to know whether the remaining 83 per cent of veterans are indeed having their needs met since no effort is made by his department to track the "needs" of this population.
The primary focus of the minister's op-ed is the legislation for Canadian Forces members and veterans known as the "New Veterans Charter." He rightly points out that Parliament was unanimous in endorsing "wholesale change to veterans' support and services" for post-World War II Canadian Forces veterans. What he leaves out is that Parliament never scrutinized the legislation in a House committee and not a single word of debate was permitted amongst MPs.
Bureaucracy and successive ministers promised Canadians that the legislation was open to regular changes, claiming the new program was a "living Charter."
Since that time, Fantino's government has wrongly taken credit for the $4.7-billion, which has been cumulatively added to the department's budget since 2006. What the minister does not explain is that almost 50 per cent of those funds were cost of living increases hard-wired into Parliamentary law. A substantial part of the remaining $4.7-billion was allocated as early as 2005 as part of the legislation which replaced lifetime disability pensions for lifelong injuries with one-time lump sums. The bureaucrats anticipated the increased upfront cost of the lump sum program would eventually save the department money in what one callous bureaucrat of the time proclaimed would be a "wellness dividend."
In a not so veiled attack on the lifelong pension, the minister claims that the lump sum program does not "simply throw money at a problem or a person." This is a rather rich claim since the lump sum is seen by rehabilitation and medical as well as veteran policy experts as doing exactly that: throwing money in the short term at a veteran and leaving most recipients without anything to show for their lifelong injuries in the years that follow.
The minister is quick to laud the recent veterans ombudsman report which notes that unfair comparisons are made between the lump sum and lifelong disability pensions without considering the "overall suite of monetary and non-monetary benefits provided under the New Veterans Charter." The minister claims this "cherry picking" is not objective. What the minister omits and the veterans ombudsman overlooked is that a recent uncontested Federal Court ruling concludes that compensation for pain and suffering must be considered completely separate from other economic financial benefits.
Because of this ruling it is both legal and correct to compare these two programs directly. Even the ombudsman notes that "there are undeniable differences between the value" of the two programs. Even with all programs taken into account, the Veterans Ombudsman concludes that the "overall value"
of the New Veterans Charter programs is below the benefits paid under the lifelong disability program.
The minister asserts that his department implemented "over 160 recommendations that were determined after wide consultation." However, repeated efforts over the past two years by organizations such as the Royal Canadian Legion and other veterans' groups to obtain a detailed accounting of the ethereal changes resulting from the implemented recommendations have yet to materialize from Fantino's department.
In his final words, the minister concludes that an upcoming review of the New Veterans Charter in Parliament will work towards "appropriate change" to address the "needs" of veterans and their families. However, the previous review proposed 16 areas of change, each necessitating a handful of specific remedies. The result was that the bureaucracy ignored all but four specific remedies.
As for attempts to placate the overwhelming cries to reinstate the lifelong pension: the department implemented a choice to receive the lump sum all at once or the same lump sum paid over any chosen period. It is not surprising that less than five per cent of recipients of the lump sum chose to take it over
time and none were given the choice between a lifelong pension and a one-time lump sum payment.
The minister's cherry picking of facts has served to only further inflame a veteran and family population far too bruised by bureaucratic insensitivity and empty political rhetoric. It is the veterans and their families who must define what is "appropriate change" and what they "need." It is nothing less than
condescending paternalism for a department, 99 per cent of which has never served in the military, to tell a veteran what he or she "needs."
The Department's Values and Ethics states that "we are accountable and responsible for our actions and accept the consequences for our decisions." Are these words just another half-truth?
Sean Bruyea is vice-president of Canadians for Accountability and he is also a veteran.
To unsubscribe from these announcements, login to the forum and uncheck "Receive forum announcements and important notifications by email." in your profile.
You can view the full announcement by following this link:
http://canadianveteransadvocacy.com/Board2/index.php?topic=11483.0
Regards,
The Canadian Veterans Advocacy Team.
New announcement: Corporal leaving military after PTSD walk disagreement
Corporal leaving military after PTSD walk disagreement
CTV Montreal
Published Sunday, October 13, 2013 6:52PM EDT
CHECK the Video: http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/corporal-leaving-military-after-ptsd-walk-disagreement-1.1496313
A Canadian soldier is leaving the military after being denied time off work to raise money for a military charity.
Cpl. Kate MacEachern raised $20,000 for the charity Soldier On last year by walking more than 500 kilometres in her Long Way Home trek, but when she asked for time off to walk even farther this year, her bosses said no.
The walk aims to raise money to help vets, particularly those stricken with post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
"When I asked permission this year, I had a feeling that I wasn't actually going to get it. I already knew that if it came back as a no, I was ending my career," said MacEachern, who was passing through Montreal Sunday.
Last year, MacEachern walked from CFB Gagetown in New Brunswick, where she is posted, to her hometown of Antigonish, N.S. She received accolades from her superiors and even Defence Minister Peter MacKay.
"I have not ever felt so strongly or been so devoted to something in my entire life," an emotional MacEachern said.
According to CFB Gagetown internal memos, MacEachern's superiors said there would be no one to replace her during the 45 days she requested off to complete this year's 1,600 kilometre walk from Gagetown to Ottawa. This time, the walk will benefit Military Minds, an organization that helps soldiers suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.
Officially, MacEachern is only allotted 25 vacation days annually.
MacKay says he only learned about MacEachern's situation Friday and has asked for more details.
NDP defence critic Jack Harris says the time to act is now and that a compromise should be reached for a woman who has received "very shabby treatment."
MacEachern, a single mother of a nine-year-old boy, will start marching from CFB Gagetown on Sept. 3.
"At the end of the day you need to stand up for what you believe in no matter what the cost," MacEachern said.
MacEachern has been in the military for seven years, and will be ending her career next month.
To unsubscribe from these announcements, login to the forum and uncheck "Receive forum announcements and important notifications by email." in your profile.
You can view the full announcement by following this link:
http://canadianveteransadvocacy.com/Board2/index.php?topic=11482.0
Regards,
The Canadian Veterans Advocacy Team.
Friday, October 11, 2013
New announcement: War veteran died before getting the medal he desperately coveted
War veteran died before getting the medal he desperately coveted
ByMark McNeil
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4152673-war-vet-died-before-getting-his-medal/
When his country called in the Second World War, Ed Wood answered in spades.
He flew 16 harrowing missions in big Lancasters as part of Bomber Command before being shot down over Stuttgart, Germany in July 1944 and parachuting to safety from 20,000 feet.
But 70 years later when the veteran called on his country, no one responded.
And Wednesday, Wood died at St. Peter's Hospital without the special service medal bar he so desperately wanted to recognize the dangerous sacrifice he made as a young man.
"I'm 90 years old and I still didn't get it," were the last words he said, his daughter Deb Wood recalled.
In the summer of 2012, the Conservative federal government announced it was finally going to recognize Canadian airmen who flew with Bomber Command.
A special bar was created to be worn on the Canadian Volunteer Service Medal.
At the end of the war, special medals were awarded for other campaigns, such as Dieppe and Hong Kong, but not to flyers who flew dangerous Bomber Command missions.
More than 10,000 Canadian airmen were killed while serving in the controversial Bomber Command campaign that is estimated to have killed as many as 600,000 Germans, many of whom were civilians.
The special medal issue was something air force veterans vehemently complained about for decades before the announcement by then Veterans Affairs Minister Steven Blaney last summer that "With the production of this bar, our government is honouring those Canadians who fought for peace, freedom and democracy through their service in Bomber Command operations over Europe."
But the medals — in some cases at least — have been slow to be issued. That's a big concern because veterans of the campaign still living are into their 90s. A spokesperson for Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino could not explain the delay and issued the statement:
"Second World War Veteran Ed Wood served his country with honour and distinction, alongside thousands of Canadians in Bomber Command. Nearly 1,000 bars have been issued, and Veterans Affairs will continue to issue them as quickly as possible."
Deb Wood said she applied twice, once before the program formally started. She stepped up her campaign through the summer of 2013, knowing her dad was becoming more frail. She said Veterans Affairs promised it would be delivered in July.
But no medal arrived.
Last week, knowing her father was reaching the end, she contacted NDP Hamilton Mountain MP Chris Charlton to lobby on the family's behalf, but to no avail. Charlton said the department should have "moved heaven and earth" for someone who fought so hard for his country.
Deb Wood said, "When I called I was given different numbers and different people and all would say is that it is in the mail," "I was told the elderly would be the first to get them." Families of veterans are also eligible to apply.
Wood believes the medals were being held back so they could be handed out at high impact ceremonies such as Remembrance Day. She says other Bomber Command vets she knows haven't received their medals either.
But she did see on television a ceremony in Toronto in August where several vets were presented with the bars.
Wood, who worked as an accountant in his civilian life, was very active with the Canadian Warplane Heritage.
Over the last several months, he was obsessed about receiving the medal before he died. She says his doctor told her the faint hope of receiving the medal probably extended his life by several days, maybe weeks.
"I believe that is what he was hanging on for. It's all he kept asking for."
Wood's funeral will be held at Bayview Gardens Funeral Home on Rymal Road on Saturday.
905-526-4687 | @Markatthespec
To unsubscribe from these announcements, login to the forum and uncheck "Receive forum announcements and important notifications by email." in your profile.
You can view the full announcement by following this link:
http://canadianveteransadvocacy.com/Board2/index.php?topic=11458.0
Regards,
The Canadian Veterans Advocacy Team.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)