Tensions between Veteran Affairs and unhappy veterans have been intensifying over the last year. The Canadian government introduced the New Veterans Charter (NVC) in 2006, and since then complaints about reduced funding, failures to meet obligations, and massive red tape hurdles have resulted in discontent amongst Canadian veterans. Equitas, a group of injured Afghan veterans based in BC, filed a class-action lawsuit arguing that the NVC violated their Charter rights, because it removed lifetime disability payments for injured military personnel and replaced it with a lump sum payment instead.
The lawsuit claims that the “government has a social contract between Canadians, arising from the Honour of the Crown, to those who voluntarily accept going into harms’ way on behalf of Canada”. Donald Sorochan, lawyer for Equitas, was quoted as saying, “Canada, has promised service people they will be protected when they get maimed and their families will be looked after if they are killed”. The federal government responded to the civil suit by bringing a preliminary motion to dismiss the action, which was rejected by Justice Weatherill in Scott v Canada (Attorney General), 2013 BCSC 1651. The government appealed this decision to the BC Court of Appeal, which was heard in December 2014, with a decision expected to be released in the spring.
In its statement of defense, the government states “ at no time in Canada’s history has any alleged “social contract” or “social covenant” having the attributes pleaded by the plaintiffs been given effect in any statute, regulation, or as a constitutional principle, written or unwritten”, and that the “relationship between members of the CAF and the government of Canada involves a social policy question that has been and will continue to be answered in different ways by different governments at different times”.
In an interview on the Jon McComb Show, lawyer Sorochan emphasized that while the courts will decide the thorny legal issues of ‘honour of crown’ and the social covenant, there is still a policy decision that the government and the people of Canada will need to decide upon. He pointed to the real effects on the veterans face while they are waiting, and the recent increase in suicides, as being a social problem that needs a resolution.
An Access to Information request revealed that the federal government’s legal bills spent on fighting this contentious legal battle amounts to almost $700,000 so far. This revelation unleashed a new round of criticisms from opposition members as well as veterans advocacy groups.
The Department of Veteran Affairs has been under criticism because of its decision to close nine regional offices and for lack of support for veterans with mental illnesses. In BC, a veterans’ hospital formerly dedicated exclusively to veterans was converted into a hospital for women and children, a decision that resulted in a move away from a holistic and integrated support system to more piecemeal care.
The 2014 Auditor General’s Report criticized the barriers veterans faced in accessing mental-health services and benefits, including a slow and complex application process. It also criticized the lack of information collection and efficacy assessments by Veterans Affairs of its mental-health strategy. Michael Ferguson, the auditor general, was quoted as saying “If you are a veteran today and if you’re trying to access those services in the disability program, it’s going to be the end of March before you have even been able to complete the application form. It’s then going to be the end of July next year before the department will give you an answer as to whether you’re going to be able to access and even then 20 per cent of the veterans won’t have an answer. And after that they’re going to have to find a service provider”. Shortly after the Auditor General’s Report was released last November, Minister of Health Ambrosa announced new federal funding for research on mental health of Canadian Forces members and veterans.
Despite promises to increase spending, Pat Stogran, former veterans ombudsperson, has been critical of the lack of substantive changes, despite the many recommendations that have been made over the previous years. Michael Blais, president of Canadian Veterans Advocacy – a non-profit dedicated to improving the quality of life for our veterans – shares a similar sentiment and has been critical of the toxic relationship between veterans and the government. Blais has called the government spending on the legal fees fighting the Equitas lawsuit as ‘unconscionable’, and that the money should have instead been spent on veterans.
The Canadian Veterans Advocacy has published reports comparing the benefits and funding under the older Pension Act and the NVC, and recommends a number of legislative changes to better suit the varying needs of veterans. The Royal Canadian Legion has also advocated for changes to fill the gaps in the NVC, including larger disability awards, improved earnings loss benefits, and increased research into physical and mental health concerns.
A recent story aired by CTV highlighted the administrative challenges that Retired Master Cpl. Paul Franklin has faced under the new Charter, the most surprising of which are the yearly requirements that he prove his condition – that he still has no legs. Franklin lost both his legs in a suicide bombing in 2006, and he claims his battle to receive help from Veterans Affairs only began in 2009, following his retirement from the Department of Defense. Franklin claims that he has to prove that he still qualifies for home care services, and has had his wheelchair taken away from him twice due to bureaucratic mismanagement.
Erin O’Toole, who replaced Joe Fantino as the Minister of Veteran Affairs early this year, expressed sympathy for Franklin’s ordeals, and announced a new three-point plan for 2015. The plan aims to improve the relationship between veterans and the government by being ‘veteran centric’ and creating “a culture that strives for service excellence”. Minister O’Toole has refused to comment on the Equitas lawsuit given that it is currently before the courts, but has been quoted as saying that the government has been working the address the gaps in the New Veterans Charter. O’Toole did comment on the optics of spending such a large sum of taxpayer money by saying “I wouldn’t, you know, want to be seeing any veteran who’s disappointed to the point of going to court. As a former lawyer, I think court has to be the last resort for anything”.