Stored#1

GUY PARENT
Published November 11, 2017


A current member of the Armed Forces places a wreath during Remembrance Day ceremonies in Port Hawkesbury last year.

There’s a demographic shift under way within the veteran population that Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) serves. It’s opening up a unique window of opportunity for injured and aging veterans and their families.

For the first time in recent generations, the continuum of care pathway, from home care to long-term care that many veterans find themselves on, can be redesigned to better suit their needs.

Today, both VAC’s Veterans Independence Program (VIP), which provides services to keep veterans in their homes longer, and its Long Term Care Program (LTC) are poised for large shifts in the composition of their client base.

As of March 2016, about 56,000 veterans received benefits through VIP, and this number will decrease by eight per cent to 47,000 by 2020. As well, while there were 6,400 inpatient veterans at LTC facilities today, by 2026 this number will decrease by 65 per cent to 2,300 veterans.

This significant decrease in veterans accessing these services will result in a $143-million reduction in program costs. This is money that could be reinvested in improving access to these programs.

The main reason for this decrease in numbers is that veterans from the Second World War and the Korean conflict have, by design, been given better access to continuum of care benefits than Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) veterans who did not serve in those conflicts.

Now, 72 years after the end of the Second World War, the numbers of war service veterans are declining rapidly.

But CAF operations have not stopped. For example, more than 40,000 CAF members served in Afghanistan, yet these veterans do not have the same access to VAC’s LTC support program as did the 26,000 veterans who served in Korea.

As seven decades of post-war service have shown, every CAF operation comes with risk and personal sacrifice. There is no distinction in the sacrifice made by veterans and their families, yet a distinction is made when it comes to benefits based on when and where a veteran served.

I believe that veteran benefits and services need to be flexible enough to move and adapt seamlessly with veterans, as their needs and care situations change. They should be available to veterans who need them when and where they are needed and with eligibility criteria that are simple and determined only once.

But that is not the way it is today.

Rather, today’s veterans are forced into a complex regimen originally designed for post-Second World War and Korean War veterans. Many changes have happened since then, like the advent of assisted living options, which VAC needs to consider in modernizing programs.

Injured veterans and their families deserve the best service possible. That’s not happening today for our aging veterans. However, the changing demographics provide an opportunity to re-invest in Canada’s commitment to its injured and aging veterans.

Recently, I released my Continuum of Care for Veterans Report. In it, I recommended seven changes to help reduce complexity and enhance benefits and services to those who need them, while ensuring that eligibility is not tied to a veteran’s status or location of residence.

Instead of programs crammed together and layered one atop the other, I recommended a single, simple “Continuum of Care” program that adapts to the changing needs of veterans and their families, as they require more support.

We know that there is inadequate support for veterans today between at-home and LTC. But, while VIP helps veterans remain independent and self-sufficient in their homes, there is inadequate support for veterans as their needs change and remaining at home is no longer an option.

We know also that programs are too complex, and eligibility is often based on service type rather than needs. Legislation and regulations identify over 28 separate eligibility groups for LTC funding alone. This makes it difficult for veterans or their family members to understand and navigate the programs.

VAC also needs to develop a strategy for providing support to veterans within the context of the Canadian health-care system. Just as VAC’s post-Second World War investment in veterans often led the way to new approaches to health care, education, mortgages and housing for Canadians, so too today, VAC is in a position to lead.

Now is the time for action. CAF veterans deserve no less than their war service comrades. If you agree with me, let your voice be heard. Speak up and let decision-makers know that it is time for change.

Guy Parent is the Veterans Ombudsman in Ottawa.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/opinion/1519490-opinion-next-generation-of-veterans-deserves-equal-access-to-aid

Test

Test

Test

The government views the old Pension Act as a blank cheque given to disabled Veterans and that's it, thanks you very much. The government views the New Veterans Charter as a much more detailed system that is much better than the old pension act in terms of everything from security, to a much larger group of benefits that is much more suitable for today's disabled Veterans.

In fact this is coming from the bureaucrats, the Minister of Veterans Affairs just happens to agree with the bureaucrats.

What does this tell you about Seamus O’Regan? It tells you two things, the Minister like his predecessors will run the Veterans file from what comes from the bureaucrats, they will be no difference between Kent Hehr, and Seamus O’Regan.

On Nov 10, 2017 from his hospital bed during an interview with Paddy Daly Seamus said just that, the pension act of 1919 we wrote you a blank cheque and said thank you very much.

Go to 34:48 of the interview to hear Seamus state those words: http://vocm.com/shows/daily-on-vocm/open-line-with-paddy-daly/

Well the bureaucrats, the Minister and those that surround him, the OVO all got it wrong!
In fact this tone or opinion has been used by the government since the enacting of the New Veterans Charter.
It is a diversion tactic used by the government to divert from the truth of the merits from the old pension act.
They, the government say that the New Veterans Charter offers more benefits than the old pension act, therefore it is more suitable for today's Veterans. It is better than the old pension act. They use quantity to justify quality, this is not legit, and it makes no sense at all. The only thing this proves is the governments failure to step up and truly look after it's disabled Veterans. They, the government have allowed the bureaucrats of this Country to write up a system that is inferior from the system they took away from Veterans. It is the governments responsibility to look after the well being of it's Veterans, it is the Minister of Veterans Affairs duty to ensure things like inferior systems do not continue to be active. They have let us all down, they are weak and uneducated in terms of understanding where the real problem lies. They all look after themselves not wanting to cause waves in their inner circles resulting in Veterans getting the raw deal.

This blank cheque theory they talk about gave disabled Veterans tax free security for life with no strings attached. Tax free security for life, the top benefit needed to stay in place but was taken away because of the blank cheque theory, what a joke to think Veterans are that stupid to believe in such bullshyte. They took our lifeline away, and now they are selling something that is far more inferior, and far less beneficial to the disabled Veteran. It's pretty hard to trust the government when these things are happening right in front of our eyes.

The blank cheque theory is missing other things besides the tax free security for life.

It also had various benefits that were also tax free;

Clothing Allowance

Veterans Independence Program & Grounds maintenance & Housekeeping  

Attendance Allowance

Exceptional Incapacity Allowance

So what is the difference between the old pension act and the new veterans charter?

The old pension act had Quality.

The new veterans charter has quantity

One cannot compare to the other no matter how hard the government tries to sell it. The old pension act was, and will always be far superior than the new veterans charter.
Don't fall for the governments trap with this new veterans charter, remember, neither the PM nor the Minister of Veterans Affairs understand the real difference between the both systems, they will go by what the bureaucrats are telling them, and the bureaucrats are looking after their own well being.

Seamus O’Regan may mean well like his predecessor Kent Hehr, but at the end of the day, they are both useless.
Hehr could not deliver, Seamus won't deliver either.