Proposed CF Veterans Charter – An Analysis - Concerns To Be Addressed
Subject C-45 Section Analysis
General Section 2(5) Charter does not apply to “self-inflicted injury” or “improper conduct”, therefore there are no benefits to family if veteran is suffering depression/PTSD or other psychological ailment and commits suicide.
Section 2(5) could easily refuse assistance/rehabilitation to disabled veteran if condition results in common PTSD/Depression symptoms of alcoholism or other addiction problems or illness/condition resulting from these symptomatic behaviours.
Section 9(2) Charter limits application period to 120 days after release, otherwise disabled veteran must justify delay.
(Pension Act has no time limit for application.)
Section 10 (3) Rehabilitation plan does not provide assistance for consequential ailments. Rehabilitation only offered for physical or mental health problem resulting “primarily” from service in CF. Physical disabilities often result in consequential illnesses/conditions. Rehabilitation unavailable for these consequential conditions.
(SISIP rehabilitation open to most if not all conditions suffered by veteran.)
Section 15 Psychological and many physical disorders require long-term monitoring and care by a dedicated practitioner. The Department specifies the person to assess the veteran’s degree of disability as someone other than their personal physician or psychologist/psychiatrist.
(Pension Act and SISIP allows personal physicians and psychological care providers to perform assessments.)
Section 18
Earnings loss not tied to disability but disabled veteran must agree to enter vocational/rehabilitation assistance (even if unemployable) for income loss support.
(SISIP requires only proof of disability from service-related injury. SISIP rehabilitation plan is voluntary and not tied to any conditions such as Charter stipulates.)
Earnings loss begins payment when Minister “determines that a rehabilitation plan…should be developed”.
(SISIP backdates payment to release from forces. Pension Act backdates payment to application date.)
Section 18(4) Unemployable disabled veteran must be defined as “permanently and totally disabled” by persons “specified by the Minister” (not by personal physicians) in order to not be forced into vocational rehabilitation. The descriptor “Permanently and totally disabled’ is far too high a bar to meet for the majority of disabling conditions which prevent employment such as most severe psychological disorders and many physical disorders.
(Pension Act and SISIP do not have such a high bar to define unemployables).
Section 19 Earnings loss and Vocational assistance deducts one dollar for every dollar earned in employment. Incentive for working drastically diminished. This “dollar for dollar” widely regarded as counter-productive in social assistance models.
(Pension Act does not deduct income for employment and allows disabled veteran to attempt employment or any industry, which may improve his quality of life.)
Section 20 (1) “Totally and permanently” disabled veteran is still required to undergo constant reassessments by persons specified by Minister even though they have been labeled as “totally and permanently disabled”.
Sections 15, 18, 20 Government could be liable for worsening many veterans psychological condition due to multiple bureaucratic hurdles, overly strict and tight departmental control over care providers, assignment of government assessment teams and constant reassessments as well as forcing disabled veteran into vocational rehabilitation when not able to tolerate demands of said program
No long-term care (palliative or otherwise) offered in Charter. Only disabled “War Veterans” given long-term care in VAC contracted institutions. CF (post 1946) veterans do not have access to these institutions.
Ministerial Intrusion and Cancellation with Minimal Justification Section 14(2) Minister may demand reassessments (Sections 15, 20 and 40) and revoke earnings loss, CF income support or impairment allowance or may modify, change or evaluate rehabilitation and vocational assistance plan “at any time”.
(Neither SISIP nor the Minister have such broad powers in Pension Act).
Section 21 Minister may cancel Earnings Loss benefit at any time with minimal justification.
(Minister does not have this power in the Pension Act.)
Disability Program Sections 45 through 56 Plan calls for large lump sum of money to be paid to veteran without further Departmental responsibility to address disability issues. Many veterans who may not have capacity to manage said money or may be in normal psychological condition (Pension Act: Department accepts long term liability of caring for most disabled of veterans).
The arcane and quasi-secretive pension adjudication process, the conflict of interest involvement of the Bureau of Pensions Advocates and the unaccountability and arbitrariness of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board are all maintained, unchanged under the new charter for the purposes of the Disability Program.
Age 65 Limitation Section 26 All benefits end at age 65 at which point the Supplementary Retirement Benefit commence. Governor in Council can change this benefit at any time and amount is not quantified in the Charter.
(Pension Act pays disability pension and allowances until death of both veteran and spouse. No deductions are made for OAS or CPP.)
Section 35(1) In order to receive the CF Income Support, veteran must participate each month in and meet the objectives of a job placement program until age 65 even if the veteran is disabled.
(No such demands by SISIP or Pension Act.)
Residence in Canada Sections 33 and 35 Disabled veteran not allowed to reside outside Canada for any length of time longer than one month to collect earnings loss or CF income support as outlined Sections 33 and 35 and the requirement to be in vocational plan for earnings loss qualification.
(Pension Act and SISIP do not have such limitations.)
Survivors and Orphans Section 2(4) If married less than one year and disabled veteran dies, spouse does not receive any benefits.
Section 13(2) Survivor vocational assistance limited to person’s education, skills and experience. Survivor will not receive further assistance beyond these skills and education.
Sections 22 ands 29 Veteran must die of “service-related injury” in order for spouse or orphan to receive benefits.
(Pension Act does not have such a stipulation to pay survivor.)
Section 23 (2) Surviving spouse penalized for having children as her portion of earnings loss will be reduced by 40%.
(Pension Act does not penalize survivors with children but instead enhances the benefit if there are children.)
Section 35(2) Married disabled veterans are penalized for being married under the CF Income Support Program, as both are not allowed collecting the full assistance ($1132.26/month).
Death Section 57(1) As written, it appears that a member that is mortally injured or wounded in the line of service and fails to die within 30 days of the occurrence, a death benefit will not be paid to the member’s survivor. Why a time limit is specified is questionable, and fails to take into account such resulting conditions as comas and similar complications that may be a resultant of the wound or injury.
Summary of Recommendations
1 That which has been most frustrating and provided the greatest obstacles in the Pension Act is still retained unchanged in the proposed Charter, including the pension adjudication process, the conflict of interest involvement of the Bureau of Pensions Advocates and the unaccountability and arbitrariness of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board.
2 Charter falls far short of addressing needs of psychologically disabled veteran. Adequate plan written for veteran with 1% to 50% physical disability or perhaps1% to 20 or 30% psychological disability. Completely inadequate for greater disabilities especially psychological disabilities due to complexity and includes many more bureaucratic hurdles than Pension Act. Assessment of PTSD in CF places number at minimum of 1 in 10 of serving service members and as high as 1 in 5. This is greatest single disability of released members and the Charter does not meet their needs or respect the sensitivities and demands of this illness.
3 Charter structure clearly threatens disabled veterans income security if veteran does not comply with intrusive and controlling rehabilitation and vocational training plan. Rehabilitation/Vocational plan as part of SISIP has attempted less aggressive rehabilitation plan than the Charter proposes. SISIP found that in many cases they had to retrace their steps and offer a more managed care approach. Monitoring and assessments were consequentially made less stringent and intrusive. Veteran could voluntarily opt out of plan with own physician’s guidance while retaining income loss assistance.
4 Charter Strips away the dignity and independence of disabled veteran. Sixty years of efforts were needed to improve the less-than-perfect Pension Act and develop SISIP. The Charter falls far short in many areas as it strips away the dignity and independence fundamental to a disabled individuals well being.
5 Charter treats disabled CF veterans as if they are criminals who need to be closely controlled and monitored. The constant reassessment by practitioners specified by the department, tying earnings loss and CF income support to strictly following Department prescribed vocation plan, and demanding residency at all times in Canada provides an intrusive and draconian threat to losing income security.
6 Charter creates results in three or more classes of veterans:
6.1 “War Veterans” of WWI, II and Korea who had access to university and college education, land grants, long-term 0% financing on housing, long-term health care, dedicated hospitals and a host of benefits as well as all the benefits (and flaws) of the Pension Act. “War Veterans” did not have to be disabled to enjoy many of the above benefits.
6.2 Post 1947 veterans (non-Korea) who received less than “War Veterans” but had some assistance through SISIP but all assistance from the Pension Act and SISIP was contingent upon them being disabled. Nevertheless, disabled veteran has independence to live life with some dignity and without constant intrusion of Department. These veterans will not be eligible for the Charter Disability benefits for their present conditions.
6.3 The final class will be those disabled veterans covered under the Charter with a minimum of six new and completely different programs than those above, but in many ways inferior to those enjoyed by previous veterans. Independence and dignity are sacrificed for paternalistic and overly restrictive guidelines of new Charter.
7 The result is three or more classes of veterans who are treated with diminishing respect and assistance for suffering disabilities as a result of their sacrifice for Canada and the world.
8 The Charter development process was secretive and flawed. The Department devoted few resources to evaluate the need for new programs as early as 1995. Department procrastinated until order came 18 months ago to draft legislation as quickly as possible due to public outcry of treatment of veterans. Only a dozen or so veterans from six politically active veteran’s organizations were notified but not directly included in writing of policy. These representatives were held by the Minister to not communicate the few details to their memberships. The majority of veterans, including the representatives were never shown the legislation but instructed by the Minister to present themselves in the Commons gallery, not discuss the process publicly and support the Minister in order to force through first reading on April 20, 2005.
9 Department did not consult directly with those most affected by the new legislation: disabled veterans and service members. Multiple requests (documented) to Minister and Task Force Director to open process to input directly from disabled stakeholders and service members. Both the Minister and Task Force Director refused.
10 Department at breaking point without introduction of third class of veterans and six new programs. Department has great difficulty managing relatively simple programs under the Pension Act. Employees overworked in many areas are astounded that they will have to manage six new and complex programs while managing present clientele (210,000).
11 An Ombudsman needed to defend those who cannot defend themselves. Most veterans do not belong to fraternal organizations. Vast majority of disabled veterans not active members of these organizations. Besides, veteran’s organizations do not have legislative or investigative powers of ombudsman. Many disabled veterans among most marginalized of society. With so many programs and different classes of veterans, an unbiased, non-partisan ombudsman needs to defend those who cannot defend themselves. An Ombudsman and Charter of Service Guarantees must be entrenched in any new Charter.
Conclusion 12 Canadians have fought for over fifty years to change legislation to improve the lot of disabled veterans. In principle a Veterans’ Charter could be excellent legislation. However, this legislation reflects hastily written and poorly planned document. The proposed charter does not address the sensitivities and needs of disabled veterans, and will ruin the lives of disabled veterans for many decades. Rather, it clearly removes many hard-won entitlements, replacing many benefits with increased bureaucratic measures, ambiguous authority and uncalled-for limitations. At the very least, the document needs some careful scrutiny and should be delayed in order to undergo detailed reflection, allowing for input and final review from the CF and veterans.
OnLine Database