Trudeau under fire for saying some vets want more than government can afford

Trudeau should apologize for ‘insulting comments’ on veterans: Conservatives

By Staff The Canadian Press
February 5, 2018


Opposition leader Andrew Scheer questioned the PM over "insulting comments" he made about the government not having enough money to pay veterans last week.

OTTAWA – The federal Conservatives are demanding Justin Trudeau apologize to veterans after the prime minister said some injured ex-soldiers are asking for more than the federal government can afford.

Trudeau made the comments last week during a townhall event in Edmonton where a wounded veteran accused the prime minister of breaking a key promise from the last election.

On Thursday the man, Brock Blaszczyk, highlighted his concerns with veterans programs saying he wasn’t prepared for “Canada turning its back on [him.]”

Trudeau first thanked him for his service, then said the program’s spending needed to be taken into account.

“Why are we still fighting against certain veteran’s groups in court? Because they are asking for more than we are able to give right now,” Trudeau said Thursday to some shouts and boos from the crowd.

WATCH:  ‘I was prepared to be killed in action. I wasn’t prepared for Canada turning its back on me’: Veteran



While Trudeau promised during the election that veterans would not have to fight the government in court, the Liberals have spent the last two-plus years opposing a landmark legal case involving a group of veterans who want the government to reinstate lifelong disability pensions.

Conservative leader Andrew Scheer questioned in the House of Commons why the Liberals are saying they don’t have enough money for veterans when they have found the money for many other causes and initiatives.

READ MORE: Injured veteran that questioned Trudeau during Edmonton town hall says ‘enough is enough’



Those include an out-of-court settlement with Omar Khadr, a new Chinese infrastructure bank, a loan to Bombardier and more than $200,000 for Trudeau’s controversial trip to the Aga Khan’s island in 2016.

But Veterans Affairs Minister Seamus O’Regan says the Liberals have done more to boost benefits and services for veterans during their short time in power than the Conservatives did during their decade in government.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4007568/trudeau-insulting-veterans-conservatives/

John Ivison: Trudeau in fight he can't win with veterans — even if he's right

Trudeau was elected on a platform that raised expectations to infinity. To Blaszczyk, even the Tories look good right now. ‘At least we weren’t given false promises’


Brock Blaszczyk, seen here in Afghanistan in 2010, told Justin Trudeau last week: “I was prepared to be killed in action. What I wasn’t prepared for, Mr. Prime Minister, was Canada turning its back on me.”Courtesy Angel Blaszcyk


John Ivison

February 5, 2018

You have to be pretty tone-deaf to tell a man who lost a leg in Afghanistan that the government is fighting veterans groups in courts “because they’re asking for more than we’re able to give right now.”

Yet that’s exactly what the prime minister did at a town-hall in Edmonton last Thursday — a gaffe that has gone viral on social media and infuriated veterans.

Brock Blaszczyk stood to ask Justin Trudeau a question, with his prosthetic leg and medals in clear view. He was a corporal in the Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry, who lost a leg to a road-side bomb in Afghanistan in 2009.

He asked Trudeau why his government is fighting a legal battle with veterans (the Equitas class-action lawsuit), even though the Liberal election platform said “no veteran will be forced to fight their own government for the support and compensation they have earned.”

Further, he complained he was not eligible for the new lifetime pension option, yet the Liberals have found money to pay for the re-integration of ISIL fighters and the $10.5-million compensation payment for Omar Khadr.

“What veterans are you talking about — those fighting for the freedoms and values you so proudly boast about, or those fighting against?” he said. “I was prepared to be killed in action. What I wasn’t prepared for, Mr. Prime Minister, was Canada turning its back on me.”



It was more devastating than anything Trudeau has faced in the House of Commons, by several degrees.

“Thank you, sir, for your passion and strength, and your justifiable frustration and anger,” the prime minister replied courteously. But then it seemed as if his frustration got the better of him — he shot back with the line about veterans asking for more than the government can afford to give.

The crowd started booing and the Teflon Prime Minister was in trouble.

“Hang on … you’re asking for honest answers,” he pleaded in vain. He tried to explain what he meant but, as any good politician knows, when you’re explaining, you’re losing.

“It was pretty disappointing,” said Blaszczyk in an interview. “He said we were asking too much but, from the personal side of things, I felt like saying ‘what did you ask from me?’”

The Conservatives have labelled the exchange “shameful” and “reprehensible.” They’ve released an ad that overlays the footage with examples of wasteful government spending — Omar Khadr’s settlement ($10.5 million); Trudeau’s vacation ($215,000); the cover artwork for the budget ($212,000); Liberal staff moving expenses ($220,000).

Yet the prime minister has grounds for frustration on this file.

Since taking office, the Liberals have pledged an additional $10 billion for veterans — a huge investment in financial support that the government says should leave most soldiers better off.


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks at a town hall meeting in Edmonton on Feb. 1, 2018. Jason Franson/The Canadian Press

In future, an amputee like Blaszczyk might expect to benefit from three separate payments — two of them tax-free and index-linked. From April 2019, there will be a pain and suffering award available as a lump sum or lifetime pension, delivering a maximum of $1,150 a month. On top of that, there is another disability award for more severely injured veterans, again as a lump sum or lifetime pension, up to $1,500 a month. The third component is an income replacement benefit, which is taxable, based on 90 per cent of the veteran’s previous salary, with a one-per-cent escalator over inflation.

However, since the government was keen not to create a disincentive to work, it also involves independent testing on the ability to work and a clawback once the veteran earns $20,000 in income.

Blaszczyk said he has had a total of $320,000 in lump-sum compensation for his injuries and post-traumatic stress disorder. But he does not know how much ongoing funding he will be entitled to, in part because he works, which will affect income replacement payments.

What is clear is the level of mistrust and confusion between veterans and the government — the system is insanely complicated and soldiers are wary of bureaucrats seeking reasons to disqualify or downgrade allowances.

Blaszczyk said he was expecting $80,000 from the enriched Liberal formula but received half that, because the maximum amount was available only to double amputees. (He is considered 100-per-cent disabled by Veterans Affairs and has 58-per-cent soft tissue loss and 88-per-cent nerve damage in his remaining leg.)

It remains one of the most challenging files in government, as the Conservatives well know, and they should be wary about throwing stones.

It wasn’t so long ago that Julian Fantino stormed out of a meeting with veterans after being told he was talking “hogwash” — causing a rupture that helped sweep the Liberals to victory.

New Veterans Affairs Minister Seamus O’Regan accused the Conservatives of having developed “amnesia” over their own policy failures.

In truth, there are no gods and precious few heroes on the veterans file — beyond men like Braszczyk. Both Conservative and Liberal governments have been defendants in the Equitas case, in which Ottawa maintains it has no legal obligation to its ex-soldiers.

Trudeau may well be frustrated that his government is getting no respect for all its efforts at improving the quality of life for veterans. But he was elected on a platform that raised expectations to infinity and beyond. Former Conservative minister Erin O’Toole was right when he said Trudeau either “didn’t cost, understand or care” about what he was promising, in order to secure the veterans’ vote.

To Blaszczyk, even the Tories look good right now. “At least we weren’t given false promises,” he said.

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-trudeau-in-a-fight-he-cant-win-with-veterans-and-his-frustration-shows