I was very pleased yesterday as I watched the press conference, held by Ministers Blaney and MacKay, to announce that the Government of Canada would not appeal the Federal Court of Canada ruling with respect to the offset of Pension Act disability benefits from the Service Income Security Insurance Plan - Long Term Disability Plan (SISIP LTD). This was the right thing to do.
The same issue exists at Veterans Affairs Canada with the War Veterans Allowance, the Canadian Forces Income Support Benefit and the Earnings Loss Benefit program under the New Veterans Charter. While the Federal Court ruling specifically addressed the unfairness of the offset within the SISIP LTD, I was also very pleased to see that Veterans Affairs Canada moved quickly to correct this offset within its own programs. I commend Minister Blaney and Veterans Affairs Canada for doing the right thing by proactively harmonizing the Department’s policies and regulations to reflect the planned changes to the SISIP LTD.
I am hopeful that the Government of Canada will move to complete the regulatory process quickly in order to implement these changes and issue compensation.
I want to again acknowledge the efforts of Mr. Manuge and the pro bono* legal services provided by McInnes Cooper. Thank you for your work to improve the lives and livelihoods of Veterans.
*Editor's note: The original blog made reference to pro bono legal services provided by McInnes Cooper. The Office has since learned that these services were provided on a contingent fee basis, where a predetermined percentage of the compensation is charged for legal services in cases, such as this one, where a lawsuit is successful.
Please add your comment below. Remember if your submission is a complaint about your circumstances please use the Submit a Complaint section.
View Important Notice Details
By participating, you are taking personal responsibility for your comments, your username and any information provided. To protect your own privacy and the privacy of others, comments containing personal information will not be published. "Personal information" means information about an identifiable individual that is recorded in any form. It may include, but is not limited to: name, address, email address, race, ethnic origin, medical and employment history, and identifying numbers. Note as well that the views or opinions expressed about another individual are considered personal information about and belonging to that individual.
View Privacy Notice Details
Provision of the information requested on this form is voluntary. It is collected under the authority of the Veterans Ombudsman Order in Council P.C. 2007-530. The information is collected for the purpose of providing an opportunity for the public to provide input on issues identified in the Veterans Ombudsman’s blog. Personal information that you provide is protected under the provisions of the Privacy Act.
The Act provides you with the right to access and request correction of your personal information.
Your personal information will be stored in Personal Information Bank number VAC PPU 210.
We have been requesting your suorppt for our program to help employ veterans and have not received any assistnace. Why is this? You state you want to do this and yet when opportunities are presented you ignore them???? CSME offers programs with suorpptive service for veterans and you have yet to assisst with this effort in any way! Shame on you ..looks as though we need a chairman who really wants to help our veterans!
July 2, 2013 6:45 PM
Office of the Veterans Ombudsman
The Veterans Ombudsman strongly advocates for a successful transition to civilian life for all Veterans, and this includes urging the hiring of Veterans in our communities. Throughout his outreach across Canada, Mr. Parent meets with municipal officials to point out the ways in which Veterans can be a real asset to their communities, and encourage activities such as priority hiring to ensure their successful reintegration into civilian society. We would be happy to learn more about your program. Please call our toll free number at 1-877-330-4343 with more details.
July 8, 2013 3:26 PM
This comment is in regards to the SISIP article. How far will this go back for compensation if any. Will there be any type of news letter going out for veterans that do not have access to computers or will it be publisdhed in the monthly paper received
with steps to apply ...
July 6, 2012 12:11 PM
WHO IS ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION AND IS THERE A TIME LINE / IE HOW FAR BACK ARE THEY GOING BACK WITH RELEASED MEMBERS THAT WERE EFFECTED BY THIS
June 8, 2012 1:00 PM
I believe the heroes of this story are Mr. Manuge and the pro bono legal services provided by McInnes Cooper.
Where I take issue with your article Mr.Ombudsman is with the story that has been hidden from the public.
As a young Veteran in the 1960's we were promised that our $10.98 Cents for a 10% disability would never never never be allowed to be means tested not would we have to disclose the amount of Pension we recieved. Although the pensions were not much with respect to the amount they were ours. We lost the ownership of our small pensions when the Government decided to rob us of our small amounts so the services offered the newer and younger Veterans could have what was promised them when they left home to fight. I believe in my heart of hearts that this was problematic from the moment the Government decided to take from the older Veterans so that the Government could pay the younger Veterans what was owed to them.
It now seems that what was done in the Dark is now coming to the light.
I am wondering how many more Veterans must suffer before the system is changed again to allow for the younger and newer Veterans to get the deserved pensions they deserve.
I notice that the Government is still using stolen money to pay claims ....what about the Old Timers who had their Human Rights stepped on and who is going to bring the crooks to Trial for stealing our money.
Lets not forget the money being stolen by our Ministers and Chairman of the Board at the Veteran Review and Appeals Board.
The funds that were clawed back from everyone were stolen from the Old Timers and yet I did not get an appology from the the Minister of Veteran Affairs!
So I think everyone should thank the team that cried out for justice and then take a moment to remember the Old Timers who had their promises trounced on by our Government of today trying to look good.
So Mr. Ombudsman who is going to apologize to me and the remainder of the old timers who had their rights and freedoms destroyed! Why have you not mentioned us that suffered in silence and lost so much? I looked at my last disability cheque and the crooks are still hard at work taking my money and perhaps yours also Mr. Ombudsman; after-all where does your money come from?
June 4, 2012 1:33 PM
Jacques 861 said:
Est-ce-que vous supposez qu'ACC vas effectivement harmoniser ses propres politiques en matières d'allocation d'anciens Combattants, d'allocation de soutien du revenu ainsi que l'allocation pour perte de revenus avec le jugement rendu dans le cadre du RARM-ILD? Pour moi cela vas de soi. Mais je ne crois pas qu'ACC soit autant pro-actif. Chapeau à M. Manuge et son équipe de juristes pour le travail et les résultats.
June 1, 2012 11:04 AM
Office of the Veterans Ombudsman
In a news release issued on May 29, 2012, the Honourable Steven Blaney, Minister of Veterans Affairs, announced that the Government "is taking action to harmonize our disability benefits at Veterans Affairs to reflect the planned changes to SISIP . . . With these changes, Veterans Affairs’ disability pension will no longer be deducted from the Earnings Loss Benefit, as will be the case with the War Veterans Allowance and the Canadian Forces Income Support Benefit."
June 4, 2012 11:04 AM
Norm, CD said:
What will happen with the legal costs? Is the government picking up the bill?
Thank you for all the hard work
May 31, 2012 11:19 AM
Office of the Veterans Ombudsman
The parties to this litigation will meet in order to implement the decision. Negotiations will certainly include the issue of whether the government will pay the plaintiff's legal costs.