Veteran groups seek to influence the 2015 vote

[Acorn]

A large part of the problem with veterans issues had to do with the former minister and his behaviour.  He took an aggressive line with every criticism. The government has claimed the NVC will be a living document that changes to suit the needs of veterans.  Remember that this charter was supported by all parties and that veteran's group were not up in arms when it was being passed.

There were some hard questions posed to the CF/Component CWOs in the theatre at St Jean when the subject came up during my ILQ before the Charter was written into law. It was serving soldiers, sr. NCOs and WOs, questioning it at the time, but abiding by their obligations to "keep it in the family." I reckon a few have since retired, as I have, and are more vocal about the specific legislation (as I am not).

From what I have seen since Mr.  O'toole and uncle Walt got involved things have been much better.

One hopes, but this isn't a single issue election, despite the attempts by some to make it so. If nothing else it's going to be intereasting.

My absentee ballot remains unmarked - someone convince me.

 

[The Bread Guy]

The time to solve it was in 2006, I believe that the NDP would have supported them in amending the NVC to "grandfather" some veterans. They could have solved it, again, in 2008, when they were re-elected with another minority; neither the LPC nor NDP wanted to defeat the government on veterans' benefits. They could have solved it again, in 2011, and this time there was, and remains, no excuse ... but they choose to do nothing.

:goodpost:

Any theories why nothing happened, then?  Money?  Not enough votes in it?  Something else?

 

[Edward Campbell]

:goodpost:

Any theories why nothing happened, then?  Money?  Not enough votes in it?  Something else?

My guess ~ remember, please, that this is a governing party that polls assiduously: deeply and often ~ is that all that polling shows that Canadians' GAFF* is just too low. Remember, also please, all my admonitions about "support for the troops" being a mile wide but only an inch deep. That why I said, two weeks ago, "So protest away, one way or the other; it's your right in a free and democratic society ~ just don't kid yourselves into believing that anyone is listening," and it's why I quoted from Macbeth yesterday; with all respect to Occam and his colleagues, this is a very narrow, tiny, wedge issue about which they are free to go on and on and on ad infinitum, but they need to understand that no one much cares and it will not change much, either.

_____
* Give A F_ck Factor

 

[The Bread Guy]

Remember, also please, all my admonitions about "support for the troops" being a mile wide but only an inch deep.

Sounds like another symptom of the same disease you've mentioned before 

 

[Altair]

:goodpost:

Any theories why nothing happened, then?  Money?  Not enough votes in it?  Something else?

they had a surplus in 2006, a couple billion if I remember and the financial crisis was not even on any bodies radar. Money was not that big of a issue.

What happened is that they supported the legislation then and they are fighting for to save it now. While blaming the liberals for introducing it in the first place.

 

[Remius]

I suspect it was a miscalculation about a group/segment they assumed would support them no matter what.

I'm guessing they felt they were stronger than the other parties on the veteran's issue so took it for granted.

 

[Rocky Mountains]

By the time Prime Minister Mulcair works through funding his $18 billion of election promises, the party of pacifists is going to crash the defence budget and look at funding veterans as balanced against daycare and other more soviet promises.  Anyone voting socialist thinking they're getting on a defence gravy train slept through reality classes.  Voting for the Manchild is just as bad.  Despite the fact that the budget will balance itself, he's going to run a big deficit like his daddy.  The biggest declines in the Canadian Forces came under Trudeau and Chretien.  When junior starts looking for cash, you may get to see the 3rd race in the Liberal defence Triple Crown.  When have defence issues ever got anyone a vote?

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

they had a surplus in 2006, a couple billion if I remember and the financial crisis was not even on any bodies radar. Money was not that big of a issue.

What happened is that they supported the legislation then and they are fighting for to save it now. While blaming the liberals for introducing it in the first place.

:argument:

CPC, Liberal, NDP... if the Canadian population isn't willing to support this issue with votes and $$$ than there is a snowball chance in hades that it'll go anywhere. With Syrian refugees the hot topic du jour I can imagine we'll see all sorts of promises to feed and house refugees in the upcoming days. Where does the money/political will for veterans sit in comparison? My guess is that we all know the answer to that

 

[Strike]

From today's news summary:

Page: A1,A2
Outlet: The Guardian (Charlottetown)
Byline: Mitch Macdonald
Date: Tuesday 08 September 2015
Headline: 'It's too little, too late'; Veterans rally to get VA offices opened again
Section: Front
Illustrations:

Veterans and their supporters rallied in front of the Jean Canfield Building in Charlottetown Saturday in their ongoing efforts to get the federal government to reopen the veteransaffairs office in Charlottetown that handles claims from veterans.

Ron Clarke spent 36 years battling for his country as a member of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Now, the veterans advocate is fighting the federal Conservative government over last year's closure of nine Veterans Affairs Canada offices across the country.

Clarke, who is spearheading the 'Anyone But Conservative' movement, brought his message to a rally outside of the Jean Canfield building in Charlottetown Saturday.

"They (the federal government) closed our nine offices and I'm in a battle to get them reopened," said Clarke. "I understand both Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Mulcair will open the offices again if they're elected, so it's ABC, 'Anyone But Conservative'."

The ABC campaign launched last month as a method of persuading voters to cast ballots for NDP, Liberal or Green in this fall's federal election.

The group's goal is to reverse the closure of nine offices, including one in Charlottetown, and the slashing of hundreds of front-line employees and case workers.

Clarke said the government has already started campaigning towards veterans, including an announcement of hiring four new case workers in Sydney, Nova Scotia.

Clarke said it's "too little, too late."

"It just goes to show our point. They close the offices and cause severe problems for veterans and now they're trying to win us back," he said. "It's a crock."

Saturday's rally saw a number of motorists honking in support, as well as representatives from the Canadian Union of Postal Workers.

Gordon Perry, president of Summerside Local 129, said he was proud to rally with veterans and also pointed to a long-standing relationship between the military and postal workers.

Sandy Brace also took part in Saturday's rally after urging fellow veterans to also join.

He said there is a need for personal contact when dealing with veterans issues and that getting the Charlottetown office reopened is his main goal.

"In my case for instance, my case worker lives in Saint John, New Brunswick, and she has about 2,000 files to look after so she can't come to the Island very often," he said.

 

[The Bread Guy]

From today's news summary:

Page: A1,A2
Outlet: The Guardian (Charlottetown)
Byline: Mitch Macdonald
Date: Tuesday 08 September 2015
Headline: 'It's too little, too late'; Veterans rally to get VA offices opened again
Section: Front
Illustrations: ....

Strangely enough, the online version of that story seems to have disappeared - but not the Google Cache version (for now, anyway) 

 

[Rocky Mountains]

Atlantic Canada has 13 assorted Veteran's affairs offices.  British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba have 13 total with over 4 times the population.  Basing your vote on a demand for 4 times the level of service of the rest of the country might not pass the pettiness sniff test.

 

[McG]

The maritimes seem to provide a disproportionately large chunk of the CAF.  Should VAC office distribution be based on civil population or veteran population?

 

[George Wallace]

The maritimes seem to provide a disproportionately large chunk of the CAF.  Should VAC office distribution be based on civil population or veteran population?

???

And how many of those Maritimers have retired to Comox, or other parts of Canada?

 

[McG]

I don't have that information, but neither am I attempting to link VAC footprint to non-veteran populations.

 

[George Wallace]

I have known many Maritimers in the CAF who have found employment and retirement in Ontario and further West, only going back to the Maritimes to visit.  I would give a rough guess of the numbers being 50/50 at the very least.  It would be interesting to see if those stats are kept somewhere.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

The maritimes seem to provide a disproportionately large chunk of the CAF.  Should VAC office distribution be based on civil population or veteran population?

I would say the simple answer is that you should place them where they can provide the most people with the most services, which will almost always lead to central metropolitan centres. That said, retired members choose where they wish to retire. To me, I believe that the most effective and cost efficient method is to centralize the services where the majority of people can receive them. If I choose to retire in Cape Breton Island, knowing that the nearest VAC office is in Halifax, than that is my decision and I should be advised of the potential consequences.

To offset- I also believe that persons who retired under the old system where the smaller VAC offices existed should be given some consideration for financial compensation related to costs of travel or provided with transportation/satellite services as required. Persons who retired in Sydney, NS under the knowledge that a VAC office existed shouldn't be punished because of the decision (in so much as possible). Persons who retire there now, knowing that an office doesn't exist, than should be made to accept responsibility for it.

 

[Teager]

And now a group of vets that supports the Conservatives opposing ABC.

You may have heard of the much-covered, anti-Harper government veterans’ group Anything But Conservatives or ABC.

However, Canadians may not know there’s a second veterans’ group called Veterans’ For the Conservative Party of Canada.

“We haven’t got any mainstream media coverage,” laughs veteran Doug Furchner, of Hamilton. “That is OK because our focus is on what is best for veterans.”

The ABC group, he said, has a different focus.

“They are doing nothing but trying to stir things up and most of it is garbage,” insisted Furchner. “People may be misled to think the government doesn’t respect veterans, or help them, and that is just plain not true. I know since I have been a client.”

Now 60, Furchner in the 1980s suffered a broken leg when run over by a truck in training in Germany and post-traumatic stress disorder from his time in Cyprus.

“I have never had anything but a positive experience dealing with Veterans Affairs,” he said. “I have had a lot of support and I work with veterans from other eras, including Afghanistan, who have had similar experiences.”

You don’t hear that from the ABC movement which claims to have been born out of Harper’s service cuts and “bad treatment” of veterans. Some ABC veterans are protesting in uniform and handing out lawn signs.

“It’s made to look like they are the majority but we think we represent the majority,” said Furchner. “There is a whole agenda going on.”

Certainly ABC garners many headlines about their concerns of the Harper approach.

Furchner argued ABC, led by veteran Ron Clarke, has admitted to receiving funding from unions and is nothing more than a political advocacy group.

“We are not getting anything from anybody,” said Furchner.

The strategy of unions funding the anti-Harper movement has worked before. That sit-in outside then-veteran affairs minister Julian Fantino’s office in 2014 had participants who “did have their expenses paid for,” a Public Service Alliance of Canada official admitted to me.

But this time PSAC insisted it is not funding ABC. But a PSAC spokesman acknowledged Clarke was a veteran they did fly in and put up for a video testimonial on its web site.

“But there is no direct funding to ABC,” the spokesman said.

Clarke on social media has revealed ABC is receiving funding from “unions” but has not specified which ones.

PSAC said there is other union assistance to ABC and gave me the contacts for Jim Sinclair, former president of the B.C. Federation of Labour, who was helping ABC and would be “open and transparent about which unions” are involved.

But Sinclair has not returned calls for e-mails.

Meanwhile, the Veterans’ For the Conservative Party of Canada movement on Facebook is starting to pick up steam with more than 2,000 likes. Furchner said he got involved thanks to a call he received from a man he served with in Germany, Lee Humphrey.

“After going on a rant on Facebook about the ABC Veterans group not representing me, I received many supportive comments but one that stood out said ‘We are the silent majority’ from a fellow veteran and realised a rant wasn’t enough,” said Humphrey. “Since starting this page Aug. 19, I’ve been overwhelmed by the support. If not for the help of my fellow veterans, Scott Brush, Doug Furchner and George Shewfelt, who immediately volunteer their time to help, the page never would have grown so quickly. I’m truly thrilled that so many are willing to stand up and let their voices be heard.”

Added Humphrey: “Silent majorities lose so I vowed to remain silent no more and started the page the next day so the silent majority could tell their fellow Canadians that the ABC veterans’ group wasn’t the only voice in town.”

Now that there has been mainstream media coverage, Canadians now know.

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/09/11/veterans-group-lauds-harper-government

 

[The Bread Guy]

The Minister, defending the record of the incumbents, shared under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42) ....:

The Toronto Star published an op-ed by Tom Beaver and Ron Clarke, the leaders of the so-called Anybody But Conservative (or "ABC Veterans") Facebook, on Aug. 31, 2015.

On Sept. 2, 2015, I respectfully asked for equal space and submitted the following op-ed in response. Nearly two weeks have passed and the Toronto Star has declined to give me equal space to respond to the anti-Conservative group's misleading and inaccurate article.

I invite you to read below what the Toronto Star refuses to publish.

Thank you,
Erin O'Toole
---
I write this article as much as Erin O'Toole, the Veteran, as I do in my capacity as Minister of Veterans Affairs. This is important to note because the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces who serve and become veterans are not a monolithic group that shares the same view on issues. Messrs. Clarke and Beaver do not speak for all veterans any more than I speak for all veterans. Their views, however, are not representative of the thousands of veterans I have met since I first met Mr. Clarke when he spoke at an event organized by the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) in 2013. His group with Mr. Beaver emerged from this public-sector, union-driven campaign. Accordingly, I am never sure where the PSAC campaign ends and the "ABC" campaign begins.

There are two key issues that most veterans tend to be passionate about. First, they are keenly interested in the readiness of the Canadian Armed Forces. Second, they want effective veteran benefits and modern supports to be there for anyone injured or killed in the line of duty.

Most veterans joined the Forces between the ages of 18 and 22 and serve a large portion of their adult lives in uniform. When they leave the military, they are leaving behind comrades who continue to serve Canada, so it is a priority for them to see that the military has the equipment and support it needs. Probably the largest reason why many veterans support the Conservative Party is because they have seen both the equipment and morale improve dramatically under Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

The last Liberal government hollowed out the military during the "Decade of Darkness." From used submarines to the dated green uniforms for Afghanistan, the Liberals did not make a properly equipped military a priority. As a navigator on the infamous Sea King helicopter, I saw this neglect first-hand when the Liberals used the much-needed Sea King replacement as an election gimmick.

The vast majority of veterans leave the military without a serious physical or mental injury from service, but all veterans want to know that anyone who is injured is provided with the best healthcare, rehabilitation and financial supports available. For someone who is moderately injured, the best support is often through re-training and re-education alongside recovery. For someone who is seriously injured, the best support is through recovery and lifetime financial support for the veteran and their family. Our government has tried to get the balance right to serve the unique needs of each injured veteran.

This is why spending is going up in the Department of Veterans Affairs by an average of 35 per cent per veteran, why we are increasing the number of mental health support offices across the country and why we passed new legislation in the last session to fix the gaps in the New Veterans Charter. We have provided lifetime financial security for our injured through enhanced impairment allowances and the new Retirement Income Security Benefit. The new Critical Injury Benefit and new Family Caregiver Benefit offer additional supports for our most seriously injured. Furthermore, we have provided all reservists the same access to the Earnings Loss Benefit and rehabilitation if they are injured serving Canada.

Better service for all veterans is also why we are modernizing the department to meet the new and rising needs of today's veterans. We offer more flexibility for veterans to access services in their home, by phone, online, in person, or through automatic payment or qualification for benefits. We have reduced the number of forms veterans have to fill out from 22 down to nine, which eliminates thousands of stressful forms families have to fill out. As well, there are more Operational Stress Injury clinics across the country to serve those with mental injuries from service.

I believe that leadership is not simply doing things the way they were done in the 1950s. Leadership means we must strive to tackle mental health challenges, provide more support for families and innovate with new forms of medical treatment and service delivery based on the needs today. When our client could be a 29-year-old in rural Canada or a 100-year-old in an urban center, the needs can be very different -- but our singular focus must continue to be striving for excellence to support those who have served us.

For the record, comittments to vets so far with about four weeks left before voting day:

• Conservatives
• Liberals
• NDP
• Greens

- edited to add link to article - DOOHHHHHH!!! -

 

[George Wallace]

The article about the Toronto Star not publishing the Minister of Veterans Affairs op-ed is found in the Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/erin-otoole/conservatives-support-veterans_b_8137352.html

 

[The Bread Guy]

The article about the Toronto Star not publishing the Minister of Veterans Affairs op-ed is found in the Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/erin-otoole/conservatives-support-veterans_b_8137352.html

Thanks, GW - forgot to include the link.