Seamus O'Regan opinion article
5 posters
Seamus O'Regan opinion article
Time for a reality check on
benefits for Veterans: Seamus
O'Regan opinion article
benefits for Veterans: Seamus
O'Regan opinion article
David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: February 25, 2018
Veterans Affairs Minister Seamus O’Regan has
written this response to a recent Defence Watch
column by guest writer Sean Bruyea.
written this response to a recent Defence Watch
column by guest writer Sean Bruyea.
By Seamus O’Regan
Defence Watch Guest Writer
Defence Watch Guest Writer
Our government made a promise to Veterans that we would re-instate a pension for life for those injured during service to their country. That is not rhetoric. That is not politics. That is the mandate that I received from Prime Minister Trudeau and it is what we delivered this past fall.
Monumental and progressive changes like these can be very complex as they come into effect. And that is precisely why I have been travelling across the country to meet with Veterans and their families to hear their concerns and clarify our Pension for Life program.
Once we sat down and discussed Pension for Life, the reception has been positive. We know how important it is to do right by our Veterans and we are committed to doing just that.
So let’s dig into the recent opinion piece by Sean Bruyea recently published in Defence Watch. He incorrectly states that those receiving “Pension Act benefits collect more in pain and suffering payments” than those who will be eligible for Pension for Life. The truth is, Pension Act benefits were more than pain and suffering compensation. The Pension Act had a dual purpose as both economic and non-economic compensation. If Mr. Bruyea were to have honestly compared our Pension for Life program, he would have taken into account the Income Replacement Benefit (IRB) that our plan offers which is 90% of a Veteran’s pre-release salary. And to a Veteran who was making $60,000 while in the Armed Forces, that is an important cheque to them and their families each month.
The piece also misstates that all “injured Canadian Forces veterans, under all three plans essentially have access to the same income loss.” I am sure Mr. Bruyea is aware that the Earning Loss Benefit (ELB) of 75% is not the same as 90%, which was an increase to the income supports that was made by our Government. We are also indexing that injured Veteran’s salary to inflation and including a 1% career progression factor if they are unable to work.
The Bruyea piece also notes that Veterans “feared the government would merely offer the lump sum dissected and distributed over time.” I am happy to allay those fears as this does not happen under Pension for Life. For example, if you look at the chart included, which is actually factual, a 25 year old Veteran who is 100% disabled will be far better off under our new plan. Before our Government came to power, that Veteran would have received a lump sum for pain and suffering of $314,700. Under our new plan, they will receive $1.29 million, tax-free and in monthly payments for life. And that is regardless of gender. While the piece makes the baseless claim that female Veterans “will receive lower monthly payments”, can assure all Veterans that if they are injured, they will receive the same support that their sisters and brothers receive for life.
While there are numerous other errors in the opinion piece, I want to focus on just one more: the misconceived notion that Veterans who qualify for Pension for Life “will receive less than” what they would have previously. Let me be clear – NO Veteran will receive less than what they are receiving today and most will be receiving more.
It is clear that Veterans are better off now than they were before. We have invested $10 billion of new money into services and supports for Veterans, we re-opened 9 Veterans Affairs offices across the country and we have hired over 460 new staff.
We have also introduced an Education Benefit of up to $80,000, introduced a Caregiver Recognition Benefit of $1,000 a month (which is payable directly to the caregiver), enhanced our Career Transition Services and invested into numerous other programs that directly benefit Veterans and their families.
Frankly, the truth is much simpler to understand: our government is committed to supporting Canada’s Veterans.
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/time-for-a-reality-check-on-benefits-for-veterans-seamus-oregan-opinion-article
Sean Bruyea's Article:
http://nationalpost.com/news/national/defence-watch/liberal-government-plan-saves-money-at-expense-of-veterans-opinion/wcm/d2b8115e-19e4-4f4c-b3dd-8c287a944f2e
Wolfman- Benefits Coordinator
- Posts : 301
Join date : 2017-12-08
Re: Seamus O'Regan opinion article
The reception has been positive? The only positive reception I have seen is Liberal MP's writing articles praising their own party for bringing in the pension for life.
He praises the irb but fails to mention it comes with offsets that will turn your 90% much lower depending on the amount of offsets. How hard will it be to qualify for the irb after 65? Where is the true number from the eliminated cias in the irb?
All of this of course is taxed for those who do actually qualify after 65.
He praises the irb but fails to mention it comes with offsets that will turn your 90% much lower depending on the amount of offsets. How hard will it be to qualify for the irb after 65? Where is the true number from the eliminated cias in the irb?
All of this of course is taxed for those who do actually qualify after 65.
Jeremiah- Registered User
- Posts : 311
Join date : 2018-02-23
Re: Seamus O'Regan opinion article
Jeremiah wrote:The reception has been positive? The only positive reception I have seen is Liberal MP's writing articles praising their own party for bringing in the pension for life.
He praises the irb but fails to mention it comes with offsets that will turn your 90% much lower depending on the amount of offsets. How hard will it be to qualify for the irb after 65? Where is the true number from the eliminated cias in the irb?
All of this of course is taxed for those who do actually qualify after 65.
Well said Jeremiah.
The promise was to reinstate lifelong pensions which there was only one pension to reinstate.
Seamus is being made a fool of by him following the bureaucratic spin, if he or the bureaucrats think they can go up against Sean Bruyea they got another thing coming.
No doubt Sean will bite back from this.
This Pension for Life is pure garbage, and we all know it, the more the Minister, and he's sidekick Walt try to sell this, the more backlash they will get.
It's not a matter of educating Veterans, it's a matter of Veterans educating the Minister.
All of this Pension for Life bullshit is coming from the bureaucrats, if the Minister is that naive to fall for this bureaucratic spin off, he deserves to wear it in every aspect of negativity thrown he's way.
Take your $10 billion of new money, your re opening of the offices, and your Education Benefit to those who are not disabled Veterans.
Disabled Veterans need the tax free lifelong pension portion of the pension act as legislated first, everything else is a welcome bonus.
The Minister said in he's early days he has a lot to learn, apparently now he has learned, he was taught by the evil of all evils the bureaucrats.
Re: Seamus O'Regan opinion article
Matt Edwards shared his post.
Feb 26, 2018
Feb 26, 2018
Canada Needs A Reality Check
An Observation Post Column by Captain (Retired) Matthew Edwards, CD
Liberal Minister of Veterans Affairs Seamus O'Regan repeated the Prime Minister's message in a rebuttal of the piece by disabled Veteran Sean Bruyea.
He said that Veterans need a "Reality Check," implying they are mentally incompetent & not in touch with th real world! What the hell? I voted for this clown?
Captain (Retired) Sean Bruyea EARNED his rank in service with decorations & any experience he has has moulded him. His' writing that criticizes the government's LATEST attempt to fool disabled Veterans is to be COMMENDED! BZ...
Complacency & self-interest have led us to this sordid point in reality. Canada has failed the Veteran. Casting blame should not be necessary because this mess should never have happened! Let me be clear, DEFENCE must bee NON-PARTISAN. No party politics.
When Prime Minister Trudeau promised to return the Pension Act 1919 to force, he was making disabled Veterans an election issue. That is bad form! It ought not to be necessary.
However, the fact that he lied about that very sensitive issue is very troubling. No one should lie to the soldier or Veteran! They deserve unreserved RESPECT for their offer to DIE for the nation! to say that, as the MVA did, the are not in touch with reality is to call them GREEDY when they beg for more money than the government can afford to give them! That is a dangerous message.
Will the recruit sign up, given the blatant disregard the government has for those that served in the past? Why would the government treat them any better? Those who would sign up nowadays are the people that need a REALITY CHECK! I would not trust them to be in charge of dangerous weapons of war that can maim & kill if they do not have enough sense to worry about how they would care for themselves or their families should they become disabled or killed!
One particular aspect of the MVA's attempted rebuttal was the ABSURD point that Sean failed to take into account the Income Replacement Benefit (IRB). I can answer that for Sean.
The announcement made by the Minister was alleged to be about the Pension For Life (PFL) Option (PFLO) where the lump sum Disability Award (DA) was incrementally changed from annual payments to monthly payments. Big Fat Hairy Deal! Who cares?
Instead, the Minister waxed on & on about the IRB when the press conference was about the PFL, in theory. Why was that, Minister? You could have announced the PFL on that date & had another news conference later on how the Liberal government under Prime Minister Trudeau is changing the New Veterans Charter so drastically that it resembles the NVC in NO WAY SHAPE or FORM!
I submit that the government needs to be NON-PARTISAN in their treatment of Veterans to avoid the indignity of becoming an election issue. Furthermore, the government MUST stop making Veterans so upset that they will SUE the nation they offered to DIE for! What the hell is wrong wh these people?
THEY need a Reality Check!
Wolfman- Benefits Coordinator
- Posts : 301
Join date : 2017-12-08
Re: Seamus O'Regan opinion article
One good thing from all of this is that 'they' feel the pressure! Shames would not be so quick to respond if he was not under a tremendous pressure from the veterans.
All those charts, explanations, shameless press conferences mean nothing. There are no policies, no clear cut examples of the processes, of approval steps, nothing. There will be nothing simple in that process; handful of veterans will 'qualify' for any of those programs. More VAC buildings will be renovated though. More VAC staff will be hired to do the endless paper work. More VAC 'workshops' and training sessions will be happening, new computer programs will need to be implemented (to deal with the complexity of the change), etc,. etc. They have been working on this change of name for what is already in place for the last two years. ONE Big BS
All those charts, explanations, shameless press conferences mean nothing. There are no policies, no clear cut examples of the processes, of approval steps, nothing. There will be nothing simple in that process; handful of veterans will 'qualify' for any of those programs. More VAC buildings will be renovated though. More VAC staff will be hired to do the endless paper work. More VAC 'workshops' and training sessions will be happening, new computer programs will need to be implemented (to deal with the complexity of the change), etc,. etc. They have been working on this change of name for what is already in place for the last two years. ONE Big BS
vet1- Registered User
- Posts : 157
Join date : 2017-10-10
Re: Seamus O'Regan opinion article
vet1 wrote:One good thing from all of this is that 'they' feel the pressure! Shames would not be so quick to respond if he was not under a tremendous pressure from the veterans.
All those charts, explanations, shameless press conferences mean nothing. There are no policies, no clear cut examples of the processes, of approval steps, nothing. There will be nothing simple in that process; handful of veterans will 'qualify' for any of those programs. More VAC buildings will be renovated though. More VAC staff will be hired to do the endless paper work. More VAC 'workshops' and training sessions will be happening, new computer programs will need to be implemented (to deal with the complexity of the change), etc,. etc. They have been working on this change of name for what is already in place for the last two years. ONE Big BS
Very well written vet1.
This IRB really to me is just a shadow of the (Retirement Income Security Benefit): https://cvdbsf.forumotion.com/t27-retirement-income-security-benefit
With the added in yearly 1% increase for those who qualify, and
being able to earn $20.000 in income before offset.
Note the offsets, this means that those who qualify after age 65 will have their IRB reduced to 70% and further reduced by other income sources as per the offsets.
The CIAS is going to be eliminated but the Minister says those receiving the CIAS won't lose funds because the CIAS is included in the IRB. The CIAS is not included in the IRB, not with the info given to date. The structure of the IRB cannot include the CIAS simply because it does not show in the benefit.
Re: Seamus O'Regan opinion article
I can confirm that Sean has read the Ministers article, and he is going to reply via Ottawa Citizen, stay tuned for that.
Also Sean Bruyea is going to be holding press conferences over the next year or so, he is welcoming any Veteran who wants to stand with him in solidarity or even to tell their own experience related to whatever issue he raises. So those in the Ottawa and surrounding area who want to go public, and want to join him send me a PM, and I will pass the info to him.
Also Sean Bruyea is going to be holding press conferences over the next year or so, he is welcoming any Veteran who wants to stand with him in solidarity or even to tell their own experience related to whatever issue he raises. So those in the Ottawa and surrounding area who want to go public, and want to join him send me a PM, and I will pass the info to him.
Re: Seamus O'Regan opinion article
I read this Ottawa Citizen article earlier today. It made my b.p. go up. Just a few thoughts of mine. . .
Quote " Our government made a promise to Veterans that we would re-instate a pension for life for those injured during service to their country. That is not rhetoric. "
Try googling only Pension for Life for a few pages and what do you find ? Surprise ! Just the GoC.
Furthermore, mentioniing re-instating " a pension for life " versus the only one around... THE pension for life IS RHETORICAL ! with a very POLITICAL persuasion that got a lot of veterans voting Liberal last time.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/rhetoric
"The art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, especially the exploitation of figures of speech and other compositional techniques."
There are a few other points in that MVA article that gets my goat. Perhaps I'm wrong.
But one thing stands out to me very clear.
With all due respect . . . this MVA has been a LONG time overdue with his political pms damage control article.
That's what it is.
No offense to sisters in arms.
Quote " Our government made a promise to Veterans that we would re-instate a pension for life for those injured during service to their country. That is not rhetoric. "
Try googling only Pension for Life for a few pages and what do you find ? Surprise ! Just the GoC.
Furthermore, mentioniing re-instating " a pension for life " versus the only one around... THE pension for life IS RHETORICAL ! with a very POLITICAL persuasion that got a lot of veterans voting Liberal last time.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/rhetoric
"The art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, especially the exploitation of figures of speech and other compositional techniques."
There are a few other points in that MVA article that gets my goat. Perhaps I'm wrong.
But one thing stands out to me very clear.
With all due respect . . . this MVA has been a LONG time overdue with his political pms damage control article.
That's what it is.
No offense to sisters in arms.
pinger- Registered User
- Posts : 64
Join date : 2017-10-16
Location : Facebook-less
Re: Seamus O'Regan opinion article
Trooper:Any news when we will hear a response from Sean Bruyea on Seamus rebuttal?
Guest- Guest
Re: Seamus O'Regan opinion article
ScottyG wrote:Trooper:Any news when we will hear a response from Sean Bruyea on Seamus rebuttal?
ScottyG,
The last I heard from Sean was through an email he sent me on March 01, 2018. He forwarded some links where I or Forum members could send in letters to: news@hilltimes.com https://www.hilltimes.com/contact-us
OR
to Defence Watch care of David Pugliese dpugliese@ottawacitizen.com
Sean was saying our comments on the forum in reference to Seamus's article would have a much bigger impact if we were to write to one of the above.
As far as Sean's response to the article I'm sure it will come forward. He was away from home when the article was published, and knowing Sean he is very thorough in he's writing. So should not be to much longer.
Similar topics
» Seamus on CBC
» Newfoundland MP Seamus O’Regan
» Seamus Facebook Feb 06, 2018
» Reporter Grades Seamus O’Regan
» Seamus O’Regan was at the Canadian War Museum
» Newfoundland MP Seamus O’Regan
» Seamus Facebook Feb 06, 2018
» Reporter Grades Seamus O’Regan
» Seamus O’Regan was at the Canadian War Museum
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum