Candidates' Corner: veterans

Chris Smith served in the armed forces. "I was a Cold War warrior," says the 74-year-old retired captain with the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry. He never saw combat, but he's now got a military pension. Had he been injured on the job, he would have got a lifetime disability pension as well.

But that's not the case for today's soldiers, says the St. Albert resident. As of 2006, injured vets get a one-time lump-sum payment of about $277,000 for injuries sustained on the job — far less, he says, than they would get under the old system.

"They're not getting anywhere near the money some of the other chaps and I do in the long term," he says. "That's a travesty of justice."

These lump-sum payments are a sore point with just about every soldier now, Smith says, and were sharply criticized by Pat Stogran, the former veterans' ombudsman. "I'd like to know which of the parties is going to rectify this problem," he asked Edmonton-St. Albert candidates.

NDP and Green

The lump-sum payments were brought in as part of the New Veterans Charter in 2006. Originally tabled by the Martin government, it passed with the support of all parties. Veterans, the veterans' ombudsman and Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Walt Natynczyk have all criticized the change, saying that the old pension system was better for many veterans. Stogran told the press that the changes seemed to be motivated by cost savings.

NDP candidate Brian LaBelle could not explain why his party supported the charter back then, but says he was not a member of the party at the time. "I believe that bill is horrible, myself."

It's completely unfair to hand someone a lump-sum and expect them to live off it for the rest of their lives, LaBelle says, as those sums do not account for inflation or the of cost medical devices, such as prosthetic limbs.

If this policy has created a mess, he says, then Parliament has to address it. "I would like to see it repealed." His party would eliminate lump-sum payments for disabilities and bring back the old disability pensions.

Lump-sum payments are "a cheap fix" for injured veterans by the Conservatives, says Green candidate Peter Johnston. "We're totally against lump-sum payments … [injured veterans] should get a viable lifetime pension that allows them to live a relatively normal life."

Johnston criticized Veterans Affairs Canada bureaucrats for operating like a "for-profit medical insurance company" instead of giving veterans the benefit of the doubt when it comes to benefits. In addition to a Guaranteed Liveable Income for all Canadians, the Greens would bring back lifetime disability pensions for veterans and revisit the charter.

Conservative and Liberal

The charter passed with the support of all parties, notes Conservative candidate Brent Rathgeber. "It was a good document based on the information that Veterans Affairs and veterans' advocates had at the time." Lump-sum payments for injuries are not in themselves unusual, he notes, and are commonplace in insurance cases.

But the charter was always intended as a living document, he adds, and will have to change with our veterans. "We appreciate that it needs modification."

The Conservatives have brought in an Enhanced New Veterans Charter that includes a $1,000-per-month supplement for seriously injured or ill veterans, Rathgeber says, and allows veterans to spread their lump-sum payment over a number of years. The changes ensure that injured veterans will get at least $40,000 a year for their injuries. They have also provided tax-free payments of $20,000 and $24,000 to veterans exposed to Agent Orange or nuclear weapons tests.

The charter needs to be revisited, says Liberal candidate Kevin Taron. "It needs to be more fair and responsive." He accused the Conservatives of disrespecting veterans and firing ombudsman Pat Stogran for his criticism of the charter. (Stogran was appointed for a three-year term that the Conservative government chose not to renew.) "I think they've short-changed veterans on their benefits."

The Liberals would work with veterans and their families to improve the charter, Taron says, and would revisit the issue of lump-sum payments. They would also bring in a Veterans' Learning Benefit to help veterans get a post-secondary education, at a cost of $120 million.