2020-21 NCVA Legislative Program

[Rifleman62]

Last years Proposed Legislative Program was adopted at the 2019 NCVA Annual Meeting, held in Toronto on December 6, 2019.

https://ncva-cnaac.ca/en/legislative-program/



Att is the current program for comparison.

 

[Rifleman62]

From Brian Forbes:

In these challenging times, and with a pending election on the horizon, we continue to take the position that Canadian veterans and their families should be closely monitoring all federal leaders to determine which party is prepared to make a substantial commitment to rectifying the shortfalls and inequities which continue to be found in veterans’ legislation.

In furtherance of this evaluation, we have prepared an “op ed” article, published on January 25, 2021 in the Hill Times, entitled “Elephant in the room remains at Veterans Affairs Canada.”

In this context, we have focussed on NCVA’s recently approved 2020-21 Legislative Program which sets out a number of major recommendations to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and senior VAC officials to address the discrimination and injustice (the “elephant in the room”) that exists with respect to the financial compensation available to disabled veterans and their families when comparing the Pension Act and the New Veterans Charter/Veterans Well-being Act.​

The article provides a detailed analysis of the impact that NCVA proposals would have on addressing this financial disparity, with the objective of using the best parts of the Pension Act and the best parts of the New Veterans Charter/Veterans Well-being Act to produce a “one veteran – one standard” philosophy.​

To repeat our conclusion in the article, “As Canadians confront the inevitability of a federal election in the foreseeable future, we would underline the fact that there are almost 700,000 veterans in Canada today and, when family, friends and supporters are considered, this number of potential voters is not without significance. The basic question remains: which federal party will stand up for veterans in the next election campaign and finally address this ‘elephant in the room’?”

We will continue to pursue our crusade to reform veterans’ legislation by maintaining pressure on the relevant political and departmental decision makers,

All the best, Brian

 

[TCM621]

From Brian Forbes:

In these challenging times, and with a pending election on the horizon, we continue to take the position that Canadian veterans and their families should be closely monitoring all federal leaders to determine which party is prepared to make a substantial commitment to rectifying the shortfalls and inequities which continue to be found in veterans’ legislation.

In furtherance of this evaluation, we have prepared an “op ed” article, published on January 25, 2021 in the Hill Times, entitled “Elephant in the room remains at Veterans Affairs Canada.”

In this context, we have focussed on NCVA’s recently approved 2020-21 Legislative Program which sets out a number of major recommendations to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and senior VAC officials to address the discrimination and injustice (the “elephant in the room”) that exists with respect to the financial compensation available to disabled veterans and their families when comparing the Pension Act and the New Veterans Charter/Veterans Well-being Act.​

The article provides a detailed analysis of the impact that NCVA proposals would have on addressing this financial disparity, with the objective of using the best parts of the Pension Act and the best parts of the New Veterans Charter/Veterans Well-being Act to produce a “one veteran – one standard” philosophy.​

To repeat our conclusion in the article, “As Canadians confront the inevitability of a federal election in the foreseeable future, we would underline the fact that there are almost 700,000 veterans in Canada today and, when family, friends and supporters are considered, this number of potential voters is not without significance. The basic question remains: which federal party will stand up for veterans in the next election campaign and finally address this ‘elephant in the room’?”

We will continue to pursue our crusade to reform veterans’ legislation by maintaining pressure on the relevant political and departmental decision makers,

All the best, Brian

About fucking time someone put it in terms politicians can understand. The ABC crowd hurt the Conservatives in 2015 and, while I think they were both short sighted and willfully ignorant of the rile the Liberals played in the NVC, they showed they can be a solid power block when you piss off enough of them. Canadian politicians love to use the CAF to drawe themselves in flag which is pretty hard when you are constantly answering questions about poor treatment of veterans.

One aspect I wish they would change is the lack of transparency in the adjudication process. My latest appeal was a simple math question, is my RoM below a certain threshold or not. BPA did up an appeal and VAC came back with a different decision with zero explanation as to why they came in under the number BPA came up with. Someone did their math wrong and it should be a simple thing to figure out. It has been months and I'm still waiting to hear back.

 

[Rifleman62]

From Brian Forbes:

As you are aware, the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs (ACVA) is currently studying the subject of veteran caregivers, as set out in their proposed agenda for the new year:

That … the committee undertake a study of federal supports and services to Canadian veterans’ caregivers and families; that the committee report its findings to the House with recommendations on how the government could improve those services and supports to better meet the unique needs of veterans’ caregivers and families; and that no fewer than 3 meetings be devoted to the study.

Attached is the NCVA/WAC submission that we will be making to the Standing Committee on veteran caregivers. The brief underlines our concerns as to the inadequacies of current VAC legislation and the need to move to the Attendance Allowance/family provisions under the Pension Act which provide more generous eligibility and more flexibility in addressing the concerns of veteran caregivers.

In my judgement, this submission will be timely as not only is the Standing Committee and the Office of the Veteran’s Ombudsman reviewing the plight of veteran caregivers, but a number of Ministerial Advisory Groups will be meeting with the Minister/Deputy/senior officials of VAC in the next few weeks to evaluate the recommendations that have been made over recent years on this important topic.