It is precisely for that reason that the benefit is just, whether it be a move across the country, or a move across the street.
No other major employer (save for the RCMP) forces you to weigh anchor, up and move to a different location in Canada every 3 to 5 years (and in some cases more frequently). That's why you won't find "Move to Intended Place of Residence (IPR) on Release" as a chapter to the NJC Relocation Directive. Nobody can deny that when you're looking for a new residence on posting, your own personal needs as a military family take a back seat to those of the CF. If that weren't the case, we wouldn't have such conditions like obligating you to seek permission from your CoC if you wish to live outside the geographical region for the place you're posted to. If you were posted to Ottawa, and decided to buy a home in Winchester, for example - and then when at your new unit, you're frequently late for work because of the umpteen traffic snarls between your residence and workplace. How much sympathy are you going to get if you tell your CoC "I'm sorry, sir/ma'am...but the traffic is too unpredictable for me to be reliably at work every day at 0800"?
That's why we choose a home that, first and foremost, allows us to carry out our employment without impediment arising from the location of the home we chose - within the constraints of our financial situation. Things like the size of the home, specific area chosen, access to shopping or other conveniences, etc. all take a back seat to the need to be able to get to work every day at 0800, and the need to be able to unload the house on weeks notice a few years down the road when you're posted - hopefully without taking a huge loss on the sale of the house.
As a result, when you elect to release with more than 10 years of service or are medically released, you should be eligible for a reimbursed relocation to the home and location of your choosing - the one you would have chosen if you didn't have to make that SAR mission on a moment's notice, or make it to the dockyard reliably every working day for 0800. If you give it to the member releasing in Halifax and electing Yellowknife as IPR, you have to give it to the member who releases in Ottawa, lives in Orleans, and chooses to elect Kanata as IPR. Both members were subject to the same conditions and constraints when they chose their homes on posting to the final posting location - a location they probably didn't know would be their retirement location when they first got there.
I'm not unsympathetic to the cries of the taxpayer wanting overly generous benefits to the Public Service (and by extension, the CF) reigned in. Contributing 50/50 towards the premiums for PSHCP is probably fair in comparison to similar civilian benefits. Increasing the member contribution portion towards CFSA pensions is probably fair in comparison too. However, there is a time for the CF to say "You know what, our employment is unique, and our benefits have to reflect that". I honestly believe the move to IPR on release is one of them.
What irks me the most, is that all it would have taken to defuse the situation is for MND to stand up on the podium, and explain what I just said above to the Canadian public in front of a TV camera. The CPC Members of Parliament with a CF background lack the backbone to challenge the government stance on this. Unfortunately, from a party point of view, it's not in their political best interests to do so when they can use the example of a retired CF general who decided to put on a Liberal hat to score political points on the backs of CF members.
