Are you happy with the way the opposition parties are criticizing VA?

[Rifleman62]

I am sure many here have served under an RSM/CO that they didn't particularly like for whatever reason. RSMs/COs come and go, but the Regiment remains.

It is the same for VAC. Ministers come and go. The current Minister's personality, thus image is not seen favorably by some. The opposition parties and the enabler media see this an opening to smash the Harper government. and that's all it is. An opening to smash the government. The opposition parties with very few exceptions and the enablers don't really give a rats ass about Vets. If they did they would write a Bill, get support from all the other parties and put it on the Order Paper to go to Committee, etc, and eventually a vote. Then the government would be faced with a decision to vote approval or introduce their own Bill.

The problem, besides the current legislation/regulations is VAC itself and it's systematic disfunction. A culture of deny, deny, deny.
I personally have received letters from VAC addressed to me, but the salutation and some of the info has nothing to do with me. It is a deny form letter where the client's info is plugged in.

I hope the new Deputy Minister gets a grip. VAC needs a house cleaning besides new legislation/regulations.

As ERC restated above #15, my repost from Election 2015:

As I posted years ago, the Tables of Disabilities were amended effective 1 Apr 06. These new Tables, as intimated by several VAC employees are not as "generous" as the previous Tables. This was done while Cdn service people were engaged in combat.

http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/services/after-injury/disability-benefits/benefits-determined/table-of-disabilities/tod1995

 

Introduction

    The 1995 edition of the Table of Disabilities (TOD) is the instrument used by Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) to assess the extent of disability from a pensioned/entitled condition, as well as the 2006 edition.

http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/services/after-injury/disability-benefits/benefits-determined/table-of-disabilities

    The old Table of Disabilities affects decisions prior to 1 Apr 06

What this means is that it is more difficult to achieve a favorable decision for disabilities caused by service in the CF.

When you receive your rejection letter for reassessment for a disability under the previous tables, it will state your condition is grandfathered under the criteria of the 1995 Tables implying the assessment is not within the criteria of the 2006 Tables.

What 

......as well as the 2006 edition.

under the Introduction to the 1995 Tables means to me is if you were lucky to get your disability ruling prior to 1 Apr 06, you would not get the assessment under the new Tables. Additionally, for the reassessment, your disability is being assessed on the 2006 Tables, not the Tables originally assessed by, but VAC cannot take away a previous assessment, thus grandfathered. No wonder reassessments are very probably not often favorably granted.

Not only the loss of a monthly pension in favor of a insulting one time cash settlement, but difficulty meeting a less "generous" standard.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>The opposition parties with very few exceptions and the enablers don't really give a rats *** about Vets. If they did they would write a Bill...

Exactly so.  A federal election lies immediately ahead.  A Bill and a vote would disambiguate positions to be considered by voters.  Veterans, but particularly veterans who have suffered for their service, rightly command respect and sympathy from most Canadians.  The opposition parties want to talk about new spending and how they would pay for it.  Put up, or shut up.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I am sure many here have served under an RSM/CO that they didn't particularly like for whatever reason. RSMs/COs come and go, but the Regiment remains.

It is the same for VAC. Ministers come and go. The current Minister's personality, thus image is not seen favorably by some. The opposition parties and the enabler media see this an opening to smash the Harper government. and that's all it is. An opening to smash the government. The opposition parties with very few exceptions and the enablers don't really give a rats ass about Vets. If they did they would write a Bill, get support from all the other parties and put it on the Order Paper to go to Committee, etc, and eventually a vote. Then the government would be faced with a decision to vote approval or introduce their own Bill.

The problem, besides the current legislation/regulations is VAC itself and it's systematic disfunction. A culture of deny, deny, deny. delay, deny, die
I personally have received letters from VAC addressed to me, but the salutation and some of the info has nothing to do with me. It is a deny form letter where the client's info is plugged in..................................................

TFTFY

 

[jollyjacktar]

Once again, Bruce MacKinnon of the Chronicle Herald hits the bulls eye with his cartoon.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorial-cartoon/2014-12-06-editorial-cartoon

 

[The Bread Guy]

If they did they would write a Bill, get support from all the other parties and put it on the Order Paper to go to Committee, etc, and eventually a vote. Then the government would be faced with a decision to vote approval or introduce their own Bill.

Whereas a majority government could fix things if it wanted, and in the current case, hasn't and won't.

To use R'man62's analogy, when the CO really wants things to change or happen, no matter what the rules asay, it can change or happen - note here, here and [urlhttp://news.nationalpost.com/2012/01/24/after-intervention-by-environment-minister-peter-kent-lucy-the-goose-goes-home/]here.  And if the CO can't/doesn't make...ing enough at any level to prove differently.

 

[FSTO]

Major (Ret) Campbell has had interviews with CBC and CTV over the past two days. In both of these interviews he has called out the senior mandarins within the department as the "architects" of the New Veterans Charter and as the ones responsible for the mess within the department. Each time, Robert Fife (CTV) and Evan Solomon basically stopped their respective interviews after Mr Campbell made the accusations. It seemed to me that Mr Campbell's version was not fitting in with the established narrative.
Do I have a tinfoil hat on or did anyone else get that impression.

 

[Edward Campbell]

That sounds about right to me. It is consistent with the current brand of "Gotcha" journalism; right now the journalists have their sights (and bonus cheques) set on Minister Fantino. Even journalists as shallow as Messers Fife and Solomon ought to know that policy is made and implemented by very, very senior bureaucrats ... people that no government regulated radio/TV broadcast news network wants to annoy.

 

[ModlrMike]

Both opposition parties and the media have had a target painted on Mr Fantino from the day he announced his candidacy.

 

[TCM621]

Both opposition parties and the media have had a target painted on Mr Fantino from the day he announced his candidacy.

It's a well earned target

 

[a_majoor]

Well I am going to throw this out there:

We (my wife and I) are in the midst of a multi year battle with VAC over payments. It is leaving both of us physically and emotionally exhausted (as we get passed from office to office only to discover one office has no idea of what the other one did. The people who work there are incompetent, lazy or both, in the very recent past we have been told there were no records of certain events [which my wife pulled from her copy of the file to refute them] and that she was never in one office (despite the fact she cited witnesses who work in that actual office who spoke to her). The latest outrage is she was called to the office for an appointment, discovered the case worker had never read her file so what was it the case worker called her in for anyway?) and my wife was told that the new case worker "wasn't interested" in anything farther back than six months ago, despite a chain of errors, arbitrary discisions and miscommunications dating back almost 4 years now.....

Of course since the amount of money is never consistent and can be arbitrarily changed, we are also spiralling towards financial distress as well, to the point we are now forced to sell our house and radically downsize before my children are finished school.

My point is that VAC is dysfunctional due to the overly complex and arbitrary bureaucracy, and I have no evidence that any political party has any plan to streamline the system, or clean out the stupid, lazy and incompetent workers who staff VAC. I'm sure "Veteran's Industry" people will be jumping up and down with delight thinking I am for "them", but sorry chums, you don't have any solution nor any "pull" to make changes happen. The only thing I can do in political terms (besides writing increasingly lethal memos) is look at the "rest" of the picture and see what platform has the best chance of offering a net improvement in our condition, for example job prospects, lower taxes and fees or any other means of pulling ahead.

 

[Cloud Cover]

thanks for that clip above George. I watched the interview that Mark gave and I am aware of the sacrifices that he made. That interview should be re-posted in the recruiting thread. I am struck by what he says and my take away is that had this honourable, brave and loyal man been blown to pieces in 2006 he would be better off than when he was actually subsequently wounded, so why would anyone join up now. Younger soldiers take heed, the government views your injuries and wounds not as honourable service but simply as an insurance liability to be arbitrarily degraded and VAC is nothing more than a cheap, low cost no-fault insurance company acting under the guise of a government department.   

 

[OldSolduer]

It's a well earned target

I would have to agree with that. I cannot see how Walt N will be able to make the system work for the benefit of veterans. I believe there is a well dug in bureaucracy that will resist any substantial change.

 

[ModlrMike]

I would have to agree with that. I cannot see how Walt N will be able to make the system work for the benefit of veterans. I believe there is a well dug in bureaucracy that will resist any substantial change.

Jim, I think you're right. We can rail all we want at the politicians, but unless the bureaucrats are on board no change will be forthcoming.

 

[FSTO]

Sadly the British comedy "Yes Minister" is an accurate description of the bureaucracy that inhabits Ottawa today.

 

[Jed]

Sadly the British comedy "Yes Minister" is an accurate description of the bureaucracy that inhabits Ottawa today.

The bureaucracies are also well dug in at the provincial level as well as at the federal level. The civil services have iron rice bowls that can not be easily shattered.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Sadly tThe British comedy "Yes Minister" is an accurate description of the bureaucracy that inhabits Ottawa today.

It isn't sad. In fact, I would argue that an effective Westminster style parliamentary democracy depends upon it. The bureaucracy, when it works well - and I would also argue that it usually works better than we acknowledge or deserve - presents a measure of stability that keeps elected governments from going off half cocked.

Not all bits and pieces of the bureaucracy are paragons of virtue or efficiency ... they, like most things, work on a bell curve and the top bits (2+% found in say PCO and Finance, 13+% found in e.g. Treasury Board, Industry, Foreign Affairs, etc) must be balanced by a similar load of third or fourth raters, some of whom may (very likely) be found in e.g. Veterans' Affairs.