# Col. Pat Stogran, CAN's New Vets Ombudsman



## The Bread Guy (15 Oct 2007)

Mods - couldn't find this via search, so feel free to dump if already up.

Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the _Copyright Act_.

*Canada's First Veterans Ombudsman Appointed*
Veterans Affairs Canada news release 15 Oct 07
News release link - francais

The Honourable Greg Thompson, Minister of Veterans Affairs, announced today that Canada's New Government has fulfilled its promise to better meet the needs of Veterans by appointing a Veterans Ombudsman. The appointment follows Prime Minister Stephen Harper's announcement last April to create a Veterans Bill of Rights and the Veterans Ombudsman Office. Following a public selection process, Colonel Patrick B. Stogran has been named Canada's first Veterans Ombudsman.

"Our Veterans have always been willing to stand up for Canada and we are proud to stand by them now by appointing a Veterans Ombudsman," said Minister Thompson. "With the appointment of Colonel Stogran, we are ensuring that the needs and concerns of our Veterans continue to be treated with the respect they deserve. Our Veterans have earned that."

Colonel Stogran is currently the Associate Director General of Science and Technology Operations at Defence Research and Development Canada. He has a long and distinguished career in the military. Among his many accomplishments, Colonel Stogran was Commanding Officer of troops in Afghanistan and also served in Bosnia.

"The contributions and sacrifices made by our Veterans have helped to make Canada such a great country. As the Veterans Ombudsman, I look forward to addressing the concerns of these brave men and women," said Colonel Stogran.

The Veterans Ombudsman Office is located in the National Capital Region.

For more information on the Veterans Ombudsman, visit www.vac-acc.gc.ca or call, toll free, 1-866-522-2122.



*Stogran named veterans' ombudsman*
edmontonjournal.com, 15 Oct 07
Article link

EDMONTON - Col. Pat Stogran, the man who led Edmonton-based troops through their first military action in Afghanistan, has been appointed as the country's ombudsman for veterans.

The new position was announced in April by Prime Minister Stephen Harper as part of a promise to better meet the needs of men and women who have served in the Canadian Forces.

Impartial and independent, the ombudsman is charged with assisting veterans to advance their issues and to raise awareness of their needs.

Stogran was chosen for the job following a public selection process, Veterans Affairs Minister Greg Thompson announced today.

Stogran commanded the Edmonton-based 3rd battalion of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry in 2002, during the American-led effort to remove Afghanistan's Taliban leadership and its terrorist supporters.

He is currently the associate director general of science and technology operations at Defence Research and Development Canada.


----------



## Reccesoldier (17 Oct 2007)

Regardless of the man and his many accomplishments I'm not at all sure that an ex-military member (any ex-military member) should ever have been chosen as ombudsman. :-\


----------



## Babbling Brooks (17 Oct 2007)

I'm cautiously optimistic about this appointment:

http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/10/meet-new-ombudsman.html

The most important role of an Ombudsman, as I see it, is to bring heat and light to a problem.  With a well-known face like Stogran, it will be really hard to handcuff him or bury his reports.  You don't appoint a reasonably high-profile individual and then try to stonewall him - if you wanted to do that, you'd appoint a bureaucrat and save yourself the hassle of playing cat-and-mouse with someone dedicated to the role.

That is, unless Stogran's easily biddable, which I'd suggest isn't his reputation.

We'll see how it all pans out, but I see this as a positive move.


----------



## redleafjumper (17 Oct 2007)

I knew Pat Stogran many years ago from summer training at Vernon.  I remember him as a thoughtful, serious fellow and I believe that he will do a good job.  He is high profile, well-known and a good officer.  He should be a real aid to this job. 

Cheers,


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (18 Oct 2007)

> Regardless of the man and his many accomplishments I'm not at all sure that an ex-military member (any ex-military member) should ever have been chosen as ombudsman.



I concur. 
We need an unbiased approach to this. He hasn't been out of uniform for more than a few years and being a veteran himself, he's just a tad bit to close to the issue.

A civilian appointee would have made better sense.


----------



## the 48th regulator (18 Oct 2007)

Here here,

I sure hope he does not tow the party line, and diffuse fault towards the Military, ergo the Governemnt, when investigating situations....

Where is André Marin when you need him?

dileas

tess


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Aug 2010)

Reviving necrothread with news that Stogran's term will not be renewed - this, via the Canadian Press:


> Canada's outspoken veterans ombudsman won't be re-appointed by the Conservative government.
> 
> Sources have told The Canadian Press retired colonel Pat Stogran, who commanded the country's first battle group in Kandahar in 2002, was notified earlier this week that his term won't be renewed.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dennis Ruhl (13 Aug 2010)

I vote for a civilian with an extreme lack of understanding of things military and a great understanding of humans in general.


----------



## Bin-Rat (13 Aug 2010)

Partial Story Clip,

OTTAWA - Canada's outspoken veterans ombudsman won't be re-appointed by the Conservative government.

"Sources have told The Canadian Press retired colonel Pat Stogran, who commanded the country's first battle group in Kandahar in 2002, was notified earlier this week that his term won't be renewed.

He apparently ran afoul of the federal government in his criticism of the bureaucracy, which he accused of being more interested in saving money that helping veterans.

News of his impending dismissal went off like a bombshell in the veteran's community on Friday because in Stogran many former soldiers found a kindred spirit, someone who understood their concerns."

For full story 
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100813/health/health_veterans_ombudsman_fired


----------



## jasatmilnet (14 Aug 2010)

iper:

Must not offend Mr "hair in the fridge" at the top!

Gawd help our vets... wimpy minister... nasty Vets Charter...

Cut and run!


----------



## Franko (14 Aug 2010)

jasatmilnet said:
			
		

> iper:
> 
> Must not offend Mr "hair in the fridge" at the top!
> 
> ...



Not so much the man at the top...but the bureaucrats that have languished in the system for the past 10 years and were a bit pissed off that Strogan spoke his mind.

Regards


----------



## jasatmilnet (14 Aug 2010)

Steady on mate! My experience of the VA staff (while I've been engaged in Service Officer tasks) has been nothing but positive... helped us navigate a cumbersome system. The notion that our vets are dying off, and so why not start shutting VA down as becoming redundant... well that idea certainly devolved from on high... Bosnia and Afghanistan... no vets from either of those... no wounded members... no PTSD sufferers...
As goes the King... so goes the Kingdom in my view... 

best regards


----------



## Franko (14 Aug 2010)

jasatmilnet said:
			
		

> Steady on mate! My experience of the VA staff (while I've been engaged in Service Officer tasks) has been nothing but positive... helped us navigate a cumbersome system. The notion that our vets are dying off, and so why not start shutting VA down as becoming redundant... well that idea certainly devolved from on high... *Bosnia and Afghanistan... no vets from either of those... no wounded members... no PTSD sufferers...*
> As goes the King... so goes the Kingdom in my view...
> 
> best regards



I know of literally dozens that are suffering and are going through VAC....I can only surmise that the actual count is in the thousand(s) or more for either PTSD or physical injuries from both conflicts, only to be stonewalled by the bureaucracy in VAC.

Regards


----------



## jollyjacktar (14 Aug 2010)

The Col. spoke his mind and I cannot disagree with what he said.   I am sure there will be a push for some spineless yes man to take his place so the screwing can continue and accelerate.


----------



## pbi (14 Aug 2010)

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> I vote for a civilian with an extreme lack of understanding of things military and a great understanding of humans in general.



And I vote that you start thinking a bit more before you post things.

You either love Pat Stogran or you hate him: there isn't too much middle ground with him. I have had the great pleasure to know and serve with Pat Stogran since 1983 (3 PPCLI, 1 PPCLI). An absolutely hard core soldier, martial arts expert and probably the most devoted family man  I've met. He always demanded that his people perform, but he always demanded much more of himself. He led soldiers in combat, and  lost four of them. He has "seen the elephant".

As long as I've known Pat, he has challenged authority and spoken out loudly when he thought things were wrong. He hated injustice and unethical behaviour, but he often had a firecracker temper that made people keep their distance. He regularly banged heads with most of his bosses. This is probably why he never made it farther than full Colonel. Although I've not always agreed with some of things he's said, both when he was in the Army and after he got out and became the VAC Ombudsman, Pat was a fighter and an ***-kicker. I'm sure he was too much of a bulldog for some of the bureaucrats in VAC, who are facing a whole new wave of young vets who are far more demanding, and much more media- savvy, than the previous generations of VAC clients who are rapidly dying off.

In other words, VERY well suited to be the VAC Ombudsman.

Cheers


----------



## the 48th regulator (14 Aug 2010)

Dennis Ruhl said:
			
		

> I vote for a civilian with an extreme lack of understanding of things military and a great understanding of humans in general.





			
				pbi said:
			
		

> And I vote that you start thinking a bit more before you post things.




And I say you do the same, as your bias, due to personally knowing him clouds your views.  In the three years he was Ombudsman, what has he achieved?  The first I heard of him making any form of ripples was with his town hall meetings.  The ones he started in the last bit of his tenure....

Dennis is bang on in his views.  Someone the likes of Andre Marin, did extreme wonders as the first Military Ombudsman, with absolutely no military back ground. He has also done the same with the Ontario Government.

You need someone that know how to do the political tango, is not tainted with any form of bias, and has teeth to stand up to the powers that be when he/she has made a decision.

I second Dennis' post.

dileas

tess


----------



## pbi (14 Aug 2010)

I don't. 

And since I'm not party to all the internal machinations of VAC,  I'm not in the position of being able to judge what fights he has won and lost: I doubt many of us will. Perhaps others know more about this. But knowing him, I'm quite sure he never shrank from a fight, and if I wanted somebody in my corner (even if I don't always see eye-to-eye with him) it would be Pat. Doubtless, he will be replaced by a nonentity more to the Govt's liking.



Cheers


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Aug 2010)

This from the Canadian Press:


> Former soldiers from different parts of the country are gearing up to battle the impending removal of the veterans' ombudsman.
> 
> Several veterans, representing different interests, were planning a news conference Tuesday in Ottawa to protest the Conservative government's decision not to appoint Pat Stogran to a second term as the voice of injured soldiers and RCMP members.
> 
> ...


----------



## ModlrMike (16 Aug 2010)

I question how much of this issue is being driven by the bureaucrats, and how much by the Government?


----------



## dapaterson (16 Aug 2010)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Someone the likes of Andre Marin, did extreme wonders as the first Military Ombudsman, with absolutely no military back ground. He has also done the same with the Ontario Government.



Andre Marin is a self-indulgent glory hound, who funnels sole-sourced contracts to a preferred mentor, and who never let regulations that were clearly communicated get in the way of a good story.

His tenure as CF Ombudsman was marked by extremely high levels of staff turnover - hardly the hallmark of a leader to emulate.

http://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/article/815727



> Three former employees and one current staffer say Ombudsman André Marin and his trusted managers are petty tyrants with bizarre and strict rules on office etiquette. In letters to government officials and in two complaints to the Human Rights Tribunal, workers allege racial discrimination by the Ombudsman’s Office, which has denied discrimination against employees.
> 
> Marin has been dubbed “Napoleon” by the fearful employees. Nevertheless they put their names to the allegations.


----------



## the 48th regulator (16 Aug 2010)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Andre Marin is a self-indulgent glory hound, who funnels sole-sourced contracts to a preferred mentor, and who never let regulations that were clearly communicated get in the way of a good story.
> 
> His tenure as CF Ombudsman was marked by extremely high levels of staff turnover - hardly the hallmark of a leader to emulate.
> 
> http://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/article/815727




Dunno,

But this is what Christie Blatchford, a huge fan and champion of the CF said about him;

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/a-mandate-to-be-tough-and-thorough-cant-be-turned-on-and-off/article1585365/



> Now, Mr. Marin is a tough S.O.B.
> 
> I got to know him a little when he was the head of the Special Investigations Unit, the independent agency which investigates police shootings and the like in Ontario. He was fearless, there and later as the Canadian Forces’ ombudsman.
> 
> ...




Thanks Dap, but, I will stick to my original post, and to Blatch's assessment....

dileas

tess


----------



## dapaterson (16 Aug 2010)

Perhaps I'm just old school, but I pay for my own toiletries and don't expense them to my job, and don't have a big screen TV and digital cable, let alone get them and bill them to the province of Ontario.

But then, what can you expect for a salary of only $215,790.71 (plus benefits).


----------



## the 48th regulator (16 Aug 2010)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Perhaps I'm just old school, but I pay for my own toiletries and don't expense them to my job, and don't have a big screen TV and digital cable, let alone get them and bill them to the province of Ontario.
> 
> But then, what can you expect for a salary of only $215,790.71 (plus benefits).



Oh the Devil,


I bet he also eats meat, and sleeps in on Sundays....

dileas

tess


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Aug 2010)

....from Pat Stogran's Twitter feed:


> It's amazing how the US is rallying behind their Veterans! They learned from Viet Nam! We haven't, and we will feel it in 20 years! P@





> Preparing for (today)'s press conference. The level of insincerity to our Veterans hurts just thinking about it as I write my script! P@





> VAC and VRAB people are climbing over each other to tell me they are being told to treat Veterans in a way they think is unfair! P@





> Press conference today. It's hard for me not to get angry when I think how our vets are being treated! P@





> Mas Oyama said "Strike o the moment of being struck, kill at the moment of being killed!" P@


It'll be interesting to see what comes out of today's news conference...


----------



## OldSolduer (17 Aug 2010)

Agreed. Most interesting.


----------



## the 48th regulator (17 Aug 2010)

Link to Newconference Live at 2pmET / 11am PT 

dileas

tess


----------



## Sapplicant (17 Aug 2010)

http://news.ca.msn.com/top-stories/cbc-article.aspx?cp-documentid=25234715

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20100817/strogen-veterans-ombudsman-100817/


Certainly is nice to see the Opposition focusing on the treatment of our Veterans as opposed to detained 'Taliban'. I support this kind of political posturing.  ;D


----------



## OldSolduer (17 Aug 2010)

It has turned out to be very interesting. Thanks for the links. Lets hope its on the 6 o'clock news, or will it be bumped for some celebrity getting drunk and stupid?


----------



## mikeninercharlie (17 Aug 2010)

Well, that was a non event... So much for naming and shaming anyone. The news reporting system in this country is driven by clear, concise sound bites that have been carefully crafted to sway / cement public opinion in favour of veteran's issues. That didn't happen during this much anticipated press conference. And, then to threaten violence in order to advance the cause was a huge mistake. I understand that people are extremely frustrated with the way their cases are being managed but the threat of violence will likely make it even more difficult to access VAC services. 
Don't get me wrong here, I feel that vets are getting a raw deal and that the New Veterans Charter should be scrapped however, today's panel didn't advance the cause that's so near and dear to many of us. :2c:
edited for crap spelling


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Aug 2010)

Good line from one of the news conference participants, via reporter's Twitter feed (she was watching the news conference):

Cdn vet who fought in Gulf War and now dying of ALS tells his story, and gives this quote at the end... - ...My advice to the ministry is, if you're not willing to stand behind the troops, try standing in front of them.

And the "ouch" quote (if confirmed), from Stogran?
Whoa-Stogran just said a TB1 off'l said it's in gov's interest to have a soldier killed vs.getting injured 'cause it's shorter term liability

_1 - likely Treasury Board of Canada in this context_


----------



## OldTanker (17 Aug 2010)

My perspective on this was that while there was a very important message here, the Ombudsman squandered the opportunity to get the nation's attention (if that was even possible) with a poorly-staged press conference. I can't blame the participants for being inarticulate or nervous in front of the camera, in fact I applaud their courage, but much of what was said, and how it was said, did not come across well.  As a veteran, with a disability, I'm not sure this has advanced our situation very much. I hope I am wrong.


----------



## dapaterson (17 Aug 2010)

mikeninercharlie said:
			
		

> however, today's panel didn't advance the cause that's so near and dear to many of us. :2c:



From my limited knowledge of Col (ret`d) Stogran, that's like complaining on 07 June 1944 that Berlin hadn't fallen yet.  The public battle has just begun.


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Aug 2010)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> From my limited knowledge of Col (ret`d) Stogran, that's like complaining on 07 June 1944 that Berlin hadn't fallen yet.  *The public battle has just begun.*


Bang on, with this as a key message already being bandied about by (at least) the NDP.


----------



## OldSolduer (17 Aug 2010)

Who'd a thunk that the NDP would be agreeing with a bunch of knuckledraggers? Have the planets aligned?


----------



## the 48th regulator (17 Aug 2010)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Who'd a thunk that the NDP would be agreeing with a bunch of knuckledraggers? Have the planets aligned?



 :rofl:

NDP Political Stance on Veterans' and their plight

dileas

tess


----------



## Nemo888 (17 Aug 2010)

Looks like the Ombudsman got sacked for speaking up.

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/08/17/veterans-ombudsman-stogran.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/ottawa-failing-its-troops-watchdog-warns/article1676115/
I love this quote from Col. Strogan,_ “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.”
_
http://winnipeg.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100817/strogen-veterans-ombudsman-100817/20100817/?hub=WinnipegHome
_"It is beyond my comprehension how the system could knowingly deny so many of our veterans the services and benefits that the people and the government of Canada recognized a long, long time ago as being their obligation to provide," he said.

"After a mere two years and nine months, we've been confronted with the tasks of staffing the office, identifying the ways that our veterans are being unfairly treated and developing doctrines and protocols to redress them," he said. "All the while being impeded by a bureaucracy that was deliberately obstructive and deceptive."

"It's hard for me not to get angry when I think how our vets are being treated,"_

VAC is such a disaster now with the New Screw Veterans Charter.


----------



## kratz (17 Aug 2010)

It's no real suprise this headline has in the news already. The highlight is mine.

from thestar.com



> *Veterans wanted dead, not alive, ombudsman charges*
> 
> OTTAWA – Col. Pat Stogran, a retired infantry officer, has spent the last three years advocating better treatment for Canada’s wounded veterans.
> 
> ...


----------



## dogger1936 (17 Aug 2010)

Honestly I cried on my drive home today hearing this finally became a issue. Todays vet's deserve a pension. And it was very emotional to hear someone else asking for it.


----------



## OldSolduer (17 Aug 2010)

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Honestly I cried on my drive home today hearing this finally became a issue. Todays vet's deserve a pension. And it was very emotional to hear someone else asking for it.


A slow burn here, I am disgusted by this. No soldier should have to resort to the media to get what is rightfully theirs.


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Aug 2010)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> I love this quote from Col. Strogan,_ “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.”_


My  :2c: :  This message, no matter how it's mitigated or countered (one TB official doesn't speak for the department or the government; we as a government, do NOT stand by this statement; the opposition is playing this up for political benefit/opportunism; we passed the Veteran's Charter; here's what else we're doing....), is going to be very hard to shake - even at election time, whenever it comes.  Hell, a wild ass guess says it _may_ even pop up in a Taliban statement down the road as they try to "encourage" (via lies) Canada to leave.

Some more tidbits from Stogran's Twitter feed post-news conference:


> I hope nobody thinks this is fun! Neither is the fight that some of our vets have with VAC, even WWII, Korean War and RCMP Veterans! P@





> I can just imagine the ways they are going to try to deflect, discredit and deny! P@





> I sympathsized for the way Richard Colvin was defamed during the detainee debacle, I will probably experience it now first hand! P@



_edited to add wild*** guess_


----------



## Nemo888 (18 Aug 2010)

Is there any more news today? One day of coverage is just sad. Doesn't anyone care about us other than lip service?


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Aug 2010)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> Is there any more news today? One day of coverage is just sad. Doesn't anyone care about us other than lip service?


Patience, Grasshopper - I don't think this will be the last we'll hear of this  ;D

Now that the "sizzle" is prominently out there, I hope the next phase involves some "steak", i.e., what specifically needs to be done/changed.


----------



## Strike (18 Aug 2010)

Enter Devil's Advocate based on comments from friends and coworkers:

1.  Most posts such as these are 2-3 years.  Sogran is not being fired.  His contract is just not being renewed.  The government hasn't helped matters and speculation though by not having a replacement named already.

2.  Comments against the government by the ombudsman have only really come to light since the announcement of his contract not being renewed.

3.  All of this will end up overshadowing what the veterans themselves are trying to say -- one-time payments are not the right solution.

Just adding some other view points out there.


----------



## a78jumper (18 Aug 2010)

I personally believe a replacement is in order. The incumbent has done his shift...


----------



## ModlrMike (18 Aug 2010)

a78jumper said:
			
		

> I personally believe a replacement is in order. The incumbent has done his shift...



That may be the most significant point, lost in the furor. 

I agree that the time is probably right for a replacement. In the context that the Ombudsman can not risk becoming part of the bureaucracy by staying on too long.


----------



## observor 69 (19 Aug 2010)

Don Martin and a bit of attacking the messenger rather than the message.


Don Martin: Veterans advocate goes down fighting
August 17, 2010 – 7:48 pm 

Nobody ever wins a fight picked against Pat Stogran.

When the Harper government decided the crusty retired colonel wasn’t worthy of reappointment as Canada’s first veterans ombudsman, they knew his response would be a carpet bombing.

The former commander of Canadian forces in Afghanistan delivered as expected yesterday, armed with an open microphone, before an assembled media horde.

It was a slightly queasy military tactic.

Mr. Stogran, a retired colonel, assembled a heartstrings-tugging entourage of physically disabled, mentally handicapped and disease-plagued veterans from Canadian missions going back decades. He then co-ordinated their attack based on the common view that fighting this government and the courts was more frustrating and painful than facing their actual combat enemies.

The veterans gave every appearance of being props in Stogran’s personal war.

No, no, no, he insisted several times. This was not about him. It was about the thousands of victims tangled up in a military bureaucracy that foot-drags, stonewalls and obstructs on ways to ease the plight of injured veterans and their families.

Perhaps, but only five days separates the retired colonel’s pink slip and his blast of condemnation over the slow pace of progress on issues that have been gathering political and legal dust for years. The only newsworthy development on this file? Pat Stogran is not getting his contract renewed for another three years.

OK, the record clearly shows Mr. Stogran is a classic by-the-book warrior. He defends soldiers above all other considerations. He understands their gripes and grievances, having seen them up close in battlefield and recuperative scenarios. He gave a loud, clear voice to those whose stories should be told and retold to make sure Canadians don’t shrug off their sacrifice as two minutes of silent reflection one day per year.

Nobody can argue these veterans don’t deserve fair compensation, decent benefits, lifelong care for their injuries and to have it all provided without the disrespectful hassle of being dragged into money-sucking court showdowns after exhausting all appeals to a deaf military complex.

But while replacing squeaky wheels is standard operating procedure for this government, some military brass go so far as to suggest Mr. Stogran may actually be more of a problem than a solution to the many grievances of injured veterans.

He is legendary within the ranks for being excessively antagonistic. He’s “all vinegar, no honey,” a senior source told me.

Mr. Stogran was known to blitz senior bureaucrats with vitriolic emails when he perceived that his positions were being ignored, delayed or rejected. As a result, they did not feel inclined to do him any favours by expediting his files, a source confided.

Of course, the optics of facing a colonel’s uprising are uncomfortable for a government that is proud of standing by the troops and bolstering their defences with new equipment.

They may yet regret the day they took a tough guy who declares “fight is my middle name” to find a more pliable candidate with a diplomatic touch.

This is, after all, the beginning and not the end of Mr. Stogran’s military offensive.

For the next three months until his contact expires on the eve of, ironically, Remembrance Day, Pat Stogran has vowed to be one old soldier who has no intention of fading away.

National Post
dmartin@nationalpost

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/08/17/don-martin-veterans-advocate-goes-down-fighting/


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Aug 2010)

This from the Ombudsman's blog:


> Dispelling the myths...
> Ottawa - 19 August 2010
> 
> I would like to dispel some myths surrounding my campaign for change.  I don't support the notion of moving VAC, I don't support the suggestion of reducing the size of VAC, I don't even support the assertion from our Stakeholders that civilian employees should be changed with Vets.  I know people in the OVO would say there is a definite advantage of having Veterans around, but I would argue that Veterans are experts at following orders.  What must change immediately are the policies and practices that disadvantage our Veterans and their families.  I know for a fact that a huge number of VAC and VRAB staff are frustrated with the way they have to treat Veterans -- they tell me as much!  I would appreciate it if you would speak out to your management, just like our Vets speak out to me and to the media, but I know what it is like to put your livelihood on the line.  Until we get substantive change in the policies and procedures, just keep trying to do your best for our Vets and their families and giving them the Benefit of any doubt you might have that they are deserving of what they ask you for.  Thanks for helping me change the treatment of those people who have made huge sacrifices for our Country.  P@ (Pat)



Interesting reading in other posts as well - worth exploring a bit.


----------



## Greymatters (20 Aug 2010)

I think it would be a lot more compelling if he could spell out exactly which practices and policies he is referring to.  

_I don't even support the assertion from our Stakeholders that civilian employees should be changed with Vets.  I know people in the OVO would say there is a definite advantage of having Veterans around, but I would argue that Veterans are experts at following orders. _ 

And I dont get the context of this (above) - are stakeholders suggesting that Vets be hired to replace civilians?  And he seems to be saying that Vets are not an advantage because they are experts at following orders...?  Whats that supposed to imply?  

Perhaps its makes more sense to someone who has more knowledge of the inside issues...


----------



## observor 69 (20 Aug 2010)

This just in from the TO Star.


Top soldier backs ombudsman on wounded vets
August 20, 2010, 1600 hrs
Allan Woods 


OTTAWA – Canada’s top soldier says complaints about the poor treatment of wounded veterans are bang on.

Veterans’ Ombudsman Pat Stogran, a retired infantry officer, went on the attack earlier this week against government officials and bureaucrats he says are letting down those who have sacrificed their lives and limbs for the country.

He was flanked by veterans from as far back as the Vietnam War and as recent as the Afghan conflict who say they’ve been ignored, been short-changed or faced hostility in their fight for compensation from Canada.

Now one more soldier with a chest full of medals and the power to influence policy is lining up beside Stogran, whose term as ombudsman ends in November.

“He has certainly voiced with clarity what the issues are,” said Gen. Walter Natynczyk, the chief of defence staff. “The issues are absolutely correct issues.”

One of the issues that most irks those wounded in the Afghan war is the government’s decision in 2006 to stop awarding monthly lifetime disability payments and to instead offer a lump-sum payment of up to $276,079 for injuries.

Disgruntled vets say the amount is much less than they would receive under the old rules and delivering it all at once makes it difficult to stretch the sum for more than a few years.

Veterans Affairs Minister Jean-Pierre Blackburn said this week that a survey of veterans found 69 per cent liked the lump sum payment, but that he was concerned that three out of every 10 soldiers were not satisfied. His department is looking at other options such as delivering the money in several installments.

Natynczyk, who has taken care in his term to highlight the cohort of wounded soldiers coming out of Afghanistan, said his “starting position” in the debate is that “we can’t do enough for our wounded soldiers.”

“We can’t do enough in terms of their recovery, in terms of their rehabilitation, in terms of ensuring they have all the wherewithal to gain their independence again, especially those soldiers who have suffered amputation.”

And he acknowledged that the lump-sum payment “doesn’t work for everybody.”

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said himself in Prince Edward Island Friday that there will be some necessary adjustments as soldiers from World War II die and the government focuses its attention on helping Afghan war vets.

“Those who have been injured in Afghanistan will become our increasing priority and that will demand some adjustment on how we run veterans programmes and is subject to a comprehensive view,” he said.

The Liberal party’s veteran’s critic, Rob Oliphant, said what’s needed is a mixed system that can provide a lump sum payment when appropriate and provide a safety net to soldiers in the form of phased pay-outs when that is the best option.

“This one size doesn’t fit all,” he said.

Oliphant is also trying to recall the House of Commons Veteran’s Affairs committee to urge the government to give Stogran a second term, particularly now that Natynczyk has come out in support of his criticisms.

That could take some time, as could the changes that the ombudsman would ultimately like to see happening. Stogran wrote on his official website Friday that if Canadians are truly upset about the way veterans are being treated, they need to exert influence on federal politicians.

“Because much of what is needed to be done is rooted in legislation, only Canada’s Members of Parliament and Senators can make those changes. The only way substantive change is going to occur is if Canada’s parliamentarians realize that this issue is a significant and urgent issue for Canadians,” he wrote, noting that veterans make up 3 per cent of the voting population, a figure that rises to 10 per cent when immediate family is factored in.


----------



## the 48th regulator (20 Aug 2010)

One thing about the CDS, is that he has been a champion of recognizing, treating, and removing the stigma ofOSIs.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJHEnVfw6dU

http://www.dnd.ca/site/news-nouvelles/news-nouvelles-eng.asp?cat=02&id=3015

dileas

tess


----------



## dogger1936 (20 Aug 2010)

Thank you CDS!

However why do I have suspicion that they will use splitting the 30,000 in 5 payments as a solution and totally ignore that the system was much better before and move back to a monthly disability pension.

Why does it seem Canada is really great at inventing new things that don't work, then doing a piss porr job of trying to re invent it?

I.e Assult troop, tank squadrons etc etc etc


----------



## armyvern (20 Aug 2010)

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> This just in from the TO Star.
> ...
> Veterans Affairs Minister Jean-Pierre Blackburn said this week that a survey of veterans found 69 per cent liked the lump sum payment, but that he was concerned that three out of every 10 soldiers were not satisfied. His department is looking at other options such as delivering the money in several installments.
> ...



Mr. Minister of Veterans Affairs - you seem to like to quote this "69 %" figure who "like" the lump sum option over the monthly pension.

Here's some questions for you:

1) Who and where are those 69%? - I have yet to meet a single one of them ... at least one who has served in this millenium's conflict;

2) Were just those Vets who would be affected by the "lump sum" over the "monthly pension" polled and our Cold War counterparts? Or

3) Did your Department send this survey/poll to WWII Veterans and those from Korea as well? And, if so,

4) Exactly what "question" did your bureaucrats actually ask them? Was it something like:

     a) If you were injured *today*, would you rather receive a lump sum payment or a monthly pension? or

     b) If DVA were to offer you *today* a lump sum in lieu of your monthly pension, which would you take?

5) With all due respect to our WWII Vets and our Korean Veterans --- I know what I'd choose in response to a question like the above if it were posed to me and I was in my late 80s. If the question was such as the above, I know exactly who those "3 out of 10 not happy" people are - today's Vets. Is that how you skewed the numbers of this 69%??

I certainly suspect it is.

You want to look after our Veterans Sir?? Then re-instate their monthly disability pensions and ensure they are looked after in a respectful and dignified manner for the rest of their lives. After all, their injuries - earned at their expense on behalf of Canada - will affect them each and every month for the rest of their lives ... 

Installments!!?? Give me a freakin' break. Invest it!!?? Give me a freakin' break. 

Hmmmm - here's my choice (hypothetical): Buy myself a handicapped accesible vehicle & pay off my house and renovate it for the wheel-chair ramp and all the other things necessary so that I can live daily with some concept of mobility and semblance of order and dignity ... but starve afterwards because I can't work for the rest of my life and have to heat it, have hydro, eat, etc etc.

Nope that grand old 250K doesn't quite do the trick now does it?? Invest what??


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Aug 2010)

Opposition is playing the committee card - this from the Canadian Press, with highlights mine:


> Opposition MPs plan to force another House of Commons committee to return early from summer break to review the impending departure of the first-ever veterans ombudsman.
> 
> Liberal critic Rob Oliphant submitted a letter to the clerk of the all-party Veterans Affairs committee Friday and demanded it be recalled *to study the Conservative government's refusal to appoint retired colonel Pat Stogran to another term.*
> 
> ...



One hopes they'd spend more time on the orange bit than the yellow bit.  

Vern, well said - maybe you're up to drafting a question or two for the committee to answer instead?


----------



## Nemo888 (21 Aug 2010)

Chief of Defence Staff Walter Natynczyk has weighed in as well. Veterans are being treated unfairly.

“He has certainly voiced with clarity what the issues are,” Gen. Natynczyk said on Friday. “The issues are absolutely correct issues.” 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canadas-top-soldier-backs-ombudsmans-campaign-for-veterans/article1680781/


----------



## dogger1936 (21 Aug 2010)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Mr. Minister of Veterans Affairs - you seem to like to quote this "69 %" figure who "like" the lump sum option over the monthly pension.
> 
> Here's some questions for you:
> 
> ...



Well said and 100% correct.


----------



## George Wallace (21 Aug 2010)

Did you stop to think that a bunch of guys spewing off their personal views, whether they are founded in truth, or rumour, or completely false, to the Media would only necessitate a large amount of clarification and correction by the CDS, deflecting him in his attempts to find a solution to the problems faced by injured Vets?  If the CDS, the CF, have some plan in the works, these outbursts only make the job more difficult, with the need to correct false or misinformed statements.

This is starting to look like the fiasco of the Wikileaks claim that four Canadians were killed by Friendly Fire.  False or misinformed statements only muddy the waters and add to the problems facing those striving to create a solution.


----------



## Bin-Rat (21 Aug 2010)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> I think it would be a lot more compelling if he could spell out exactly which practices and policies he is referring to.
> 
> _I don't even support the assertion from our Stakeholders that civilian employees should be changed with Vets.  I know people in the OVO would say there is a definite advantage of having Veterans around, but I would argue that Veterans are experts at following orders. _
> 
> ...



What this is referring to is, it's been brought up at ACVA and Other places by different organization that, while different Government area's hire people in the field of experience, so for hypothetically treasury board, they higher accountants, or people with accounting experience, someone in say Parks needs a certain experience in a field to get hired, so each department hires people with a certain field of experience as to that department.

VAC in this case DOESN"T hire people as per say ex-military, well they may, but a very very low percentage, like 3 or 4 I dunno, but everyone Does NOT have Military Experience, so therefore when your calling and speaking to people, and you explain things or how things are in the Military, they don't understand the culture cause they have no Military experience, therefore can't and don't understand what we have gone through.

So it's brought up that the other department hires people with specific qualifications, why does VAC not follow this, and they hire people with Non-Military, so this is the argument, other departments hire requiring specific quals and VAC doesn't.

Same with VRAB, they are adjudicating or making decisions about your claim, and everyone tried to explain to them what they experienced in the Military, like Camping out in the winter, cold frosty day's there, or what they endured during field exercises, and stuff like that, but since they have no Military experience of there own, it sorta fly's over their heads as to what we went/go through, but having someone with Military Experience say, Ex Infantry or a Purple trade, Armoured, someone who is explaining his field exercise and how it went wrong, and how his injury was done, The Ex-Military people can associate with the person and know what he had endured since they had/have been in that situation themselves, if you know what I mean..

For example I can say, Yeah I froze my but off doing a 2 hour security detail in a fox hole at -25 degree's, and they go Hmm, but someone with Military experience would go, Dam, ya I know how ya felt, cause they have at one point in time done that. And know that yes you can get frost bite in your feet or hands, ears from being in that situation, where non-military well they just can't imagine how cold that 2 hours in a fox hole actually feels or how cold it gets not moving around.

And that's why the argument is to have Ex-Military people hired into VAC who know the extremes we have gone though..

okay enough i am now blabbering... that's the Gist of things


----------



## Occam (21 Aug 2010)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Did you stop to think that a bunch of guys spewing off their personal views, whether they are founded in truth, or rumour, or completely false, to the Media would only necessitate a large amount of clarification and correction by the CDS, deflecting him in his attempts to find a solution to the problems faced by injured Vets?  If the CDS, the CF, have some plan in the works, these outbursts only make the job more difficult, with the need to correct false or misinformed statements.
> 
> This is starting to look like the fiasco of the Wikileaks claim that four Canadians were killed by Friendly Fire.  False or misinformed statements only muddy the waters and add to the problems facing those striving to create a solution.



Come on, George...you're not really suggesting that it would have been too much work for the CDS to politely inform the individuals who were to be interviewed of what the CDS' game plan was?  "Groom them", so to speak?  If the members who were to be interviewed had assurances that the CDS was onside, then I'm sure there would never have been a "muzzled members" story to write about.  If the members got the impression that they're being muzzled, then there's a problem.  It sure looks like that's the case.

You've been around this outfit longer than I have - surely you must know that when The Boss tells people that they're not being forbidden from speaking at a conference, but suggests that it's not a wise move for them to do so, it amounts to the same damn thing.


----------



## George Wallace (21 Aug 2010)

Occam

I was having a hard time articulating that post.  I still am.  I am suggesting that the author of this news article, who is well known for his agenda of being an authority on the CF, JTF2, etc. may not be portraying the situation as it may really be.  I am trying to say, that if the CDS and/or the CF is preparing some plan of attack or public statement, people with agendas and some good intentions, but inaccurate information may create an extra amount of work for the CDS or others in now having to drop what they are doing to correct incorrect statements to the MSM.  

We have already seen the CDS make statements on this matter.  Most will agree that he is on the right path.  Inaccurate statements to the media, only cause him and his personnel to drop what they are doing to correct those false or incorrect statements.  We all have seen the lack off willingness in the MSM to acknowledge any such corrections.


----------



## Occam (21 Aug 2010)

No arguments with what you're saying, George.  But, if what the CDS (or his staff) told the members was factually true, then he didn't do enough to prevent one (or more) of the members from getting the perception that he/she was being muzzled.  It was easily preventable.  I've read what the CDS has had to say on the issue and I'm glad he's sticking his neck out there.  But he can't afford to be shooting himself in the foot by making it appear that he's muzzled the troops, either.


----------



## Nemo888 (21 Aug 2010)

Agreed. The story in the Citizen really hurt DND's credibility. Bad weekend to be working the Public Affairs desk. 

I wonder how the spin doctors will deal with this? It sounds like, "Yes we knew about this for years. But we wouldn't dare speal about it because we were pansies more interested in a promotion than the troops welfare." How do you turn that back into a recruiting poster photo op?


----------



## dogger1936 (22 Aug 2010)

I have heard multiple views about this at my workplace. Some said a heavy handed approach would accomplish nothing. My personal view is the Col did what I would do. After getting shot down so many times and accomplishing less than what I wanted I would have to change tactics. Not only does this get it into the media (which as we know can go either way) it shows the troops that some of these "bureaucrats" ARE trying to fight for them...but are getting blocked.

Either way this goes thank you Col for your service to us.

now on the side of attacking VAC  I can say I have found them rude/ crude at their assessments. I.E telling my combat arms brother "so your telling me you sit around watching coronation street like a woman" during a re assessment of quality of life. And many other horror stories. 


Me personally have found them very friendly and helpful. I have had no problems with VAC PERSONALLY however I have a huge problem with the new veterans charter.


----------



## Nemo888 (23 Aug 2010)

This guy makes me feel like all my comments should be written in crayon.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Government+holds+responsibility+vets/3431153/story.html

*Government holds responsibility for our vets*

The Ottawa Citizen August 23, 2010

Re: 'Our heroes are suffering,' Stogran says

in shot at Tories, Aug. 18.

We note ombudsman Pat Stogran's concerns for our veterans' needs. In listening to Stogran's comments, we are reminded that all members of our armed services, including the reserves, may, at any time and at no notice, be placed by our government in harm's way and may, as a result, forfeit their lives or suffer incapacitating injury or illness such as our soldiers and veterans who have served in Afghanistan and who are now the subjects of Stogran's concerns.

Our Canadian Forces are the ultimo ratio regis of the government of Canada -- the last power of coercion available to enforce its sovereign writ. The essential role of the military is the controlled application of the maximum force under an unlimited liability.

The unlimited liability of the soldier, sailor, or airman must be matched by an unlimited responsibility on the part of the government to ensure members of the Canadian Forces have the right tools in terms of equipment and highly trained personnel to carry out the mission as directed by the Canadian political authority.

Further, in the event that the service man or woman becomes incapacitated by injury or illness or is killed, the government's unlimited responsibility extends to fully providing for the welfare of the veteran and his or her dependents.

We would therefore expect the government to ensure that public servants set aside their penny-counting attitude when serving the needs of our veterans and their dependents. Our great nation owes our veterans nothing less.

Alain Pellerin, Ottawa

Executive director, Conference of Defence Associations

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Government+holds+responsibility+vets/3431153/story.html#ixzz0xR7NZlU6


----------



## dapaterson (23 Aug 2010)

The Conference of Defence Association's missive would have been much more welcome earlier in the debate.  Popping up now suggests that they are not interested in leading, but rather in following whichever way the wind blows.


----------



## Bin-Rat (1 Sep 2010)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Mr. Minister of Veterans Affairs - you seem to like to quote this "69 %" figure who "like" the lump sum option over the monthly pension.
> 
> Here's some questions for you:
> 
> ...




Found this post On www.veteranvoice.info which A Gentleman posted the link to this report  http://tinyurl.com/2375nom

# Results and Analysis by Review Question

    * Q1 – Did you receive any financial advice related to your lump sum payment?
    * Q2 – Disability Award Spending Choices
    * Q3   How well do you think that you used your lump sum payment?
    * Q4 – If you had a choice, would you prefer to receive your lump sum payment with the same dollar amount as a single payment or as payments over time?
    * Q5 – Are you aware that there are other services through the New Veterans Charter such as rehabilitation, health benefits or earnings loss benefits?


----------



## dogger1936 (1 Sep 2010)

I called VAC today reference permant impairment allowance. The had no idea what I was talking about.
After a 15 minute on hold experience they told me only the national level could even tell me what it was all about. The only thing she could find was that it was 3 levels:

lvl 1 1500
lvl 2 1000
lvl 3 500

all these funds are taxable and although the disability is deemed permant this is ONLY when your going trough vocational rehab.

So anyone using PIA as a leg to stand on as being a fair thing is full of it.


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Sep 2010)

This from the Canadian Press:


> Former Canadian soldiers don't want the voice of war veterans silenced just yet.
> 
> A petition is circling some legion halls that urges the Conservative government to keep popular veterans ombudsman Pat Stogran on the job awhile longer.
> 
> ...


----------

