Veterans’ Expectations are High (Part 2)

Ottawa – May 28, 2014

Over the past seven months of testimony before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs, numerous witnesses have suggested how to improve the New Veterans Charter. Most have positively reflected the 20 recommendations that I put forward in my Report on the New Veterans Charter.

The main source of discontent is inadequate financial support. Sufficient financial support is a key enabler to many intended outcomes for Veterans, such as: successful transition to a new civilian career; reasonable standard of living and quality of life; and, best possible physical and mental health.

The successful transition to a new life after a military career that has suddenly and unexpectedly come to an end because of injury or illness is often a question of mindset. Financial security helps to shape that mindset. Those who embark on this transition journey with a positive outlook and hope for the future should transition successfully. However, transition is more difficult when insufficient financial means is a constant pre-occupation. I believe that Veterans should be able to look forward to the future and with a sense of purpose rather than feeling overwhelmed with the present and longing for a past that is no longer possible.

In my appearances before the Committee, I spoke about five main deficiencies with the financial support provided under the New Veterans Charter. One of the deficiencies that generated particular discussion was the inadequate financial support that some totally and permanently incapacitated Veterans may face after the age of 65. I was encouraged when the Deputy Minister of Veterans Affairs stated in her recent appearance before the Senate Sub-Committee on Veterans Affairs that “the ombudsman is onto something here” concerning inadequate financial support after age 65. This is clearly one of the substantive problems with the New Veterans Charter that I am expecting a strong recommendation in the House of Commons Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs’ forthcoming report.

I also expect that the other economic financial support deficiencies that I have identified will be addressed by the Committee because they too are important enablers to a successful transition for Veterans. I have made the following recommendations to address these deficiencies:

  • Increase the Earnings Loss Benefit to 90 percent of pre-release salary;
  • Provide the same Earnings Loss Benefit to former part-time Reserve Force members whose injury or illness is related to service;
  • Calculate the annual cost of living adjustment to the Earnings Loss Benefit based on actual annual increases in the cost of living as measured by the Consumer Price Index; and
  • Provide the Permanent Impairment Allowance and Permanent Impairment Allowance Supplement benefits to all totally and permanently incapacitated Veterans who are in receipt of a Disability Award and an approved rehabilitation plan for the condition that is causing the total and permanent incapacity.

In addition, I will be looking for action concerning my recommendations on non-economic compensation provided to Veterans by:

  • Increasing the maximum amount of the Disability Award to the maximum judicial cap for non-pecuniary damages awarded by Canadian courts;
  • Conducting a comprehensive review, including consultations with Veterans’ stakeholders, to determine what the appropriate maximum amount should be to fairly compensate Canadian Forces members and Veterans for pain and suffering resulting from an injury or illness in service to Canada; and
  • Reviewing the adequacy of the $500 provided for financial counselling.

Finally, while correcting the financial support deficiencies are key to successful transition, it is also imperative that the shortcomings that I identified in relation to vocational rehabilitation and assistance, as well as support to families, be addressed. Vocational rehabilitation and assistance must become more flexible to better prepare Veterans to realize their full potential. In addition, families live the transition process with the Veteran and a properly supported family is unquestionably another key enabler to the successful transition of an injured or ill Veteran from military to civilian life.

In short, my position has been, and continues to be, a simple one: if the Government fixes the problems that I and others have repeatedly identified with financial support, vocational rehabilitation and support to families, then the New Veterans Charter will be viewed much more positively by injured or ill Veterans. It will better meet their needs by helping them to re-integrate successfully into civilian life and by helping them to achieve what every Canadian strives for: a good job, financial independence, a reasonable quality of personal and family life, along with best possible health. Importantly, if their medical condition does not allow them to return to work, then these Veterans will be confident that they will receive the support they need to live their lives with financial security and dignity.

At the March 26, 2014 hearing of the Senate Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, Minister Fantino assured Committee Members that “we are committed to moving things forward and doing what can be done and should be done. There will probably be things we can do right away with the stroke of a pen, things that will require a little bit more work, and things we cannot do now but can put on the radar screen for the future. This is an exercise in getting things done”.

As a result, Veterans are expecting the House of Commons Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs to publish a report that will get things done and lead directly to timely action that will make a substantive difference for Veterans and their families. As I wrote in a previous blog, it’s time for a heroic moment. The Committee has the opportunity to be the catalyst for meaningful improvements to the New Veterans Charter. I trust it will not disappoint. Veterans’ expectations are high.

It’s time for action!

Guy Parent

Blog Comments

Please add your comment below. Remember if your submission is a complaint about your circumstances please use the Submit a Complaint section.

Important Notice

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.

Note: All fields marked with a red asterisk (*) must be filled out.

(will not be published)

Privacy Notice

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.

If you have any questions, contact our Access to Information and Privacy Coordinator.


Murray said:

When a Veteran is over 100% Disability say 115% should they not be entitled to the additional 15%. I am also wondering why VAC combines both the old system and NVC when it suits their needs but when a Veteran passes and the Veterans wife's would require 48% to receive her husbands full pension but she can't get it because her husband's pension is 40% in the old system and 70% in the NVC for a total of 112% and VAC does not use the. Total aggregate amount. One last question why can CFS injured members use their spouse to drive them to Doctors appointments and get paid as an escort but veterans spouses or family members cannot get paid for doing the same thing is this not bias and prejudice against the disabled. Veteran. Thank you for your help.

June 10, 2014 3:44 AM

Office of the Veterans Ombudsman

Thank you for your comment. We invite you to contact our Office at 1-877-330-4343 to discuss this further. We will do their best to provide you with information and assistance as need be. You can also use the "submit a complaint" function via our website at Thank you again for taking the time to comment on our blog.

June 10, 2014 4:50 PM

Veteran said:

I have a question - the committee report - Earning loss at 85% of net non-taxable will be lower that the 75% of gross ? Am I understanding that wrongly ?? thank you

June 4, 2014 9:08 AM

Veterans Ombudsman

Thank you for your comment. As soon as I’m back from participating in the 70th Anniversary of D-Day and the Battle of Normandy in France, I will be offering a more in-depth analysis of what the report means to Veterans and their families, including the point that you have raised. Stay tuned!

June 4, 2014 5:07 PM

John said:

I would like to extend my gratitude to Veterans Affairs Ombudsman - Mr. Guy Parent, and his team for having the courage and tenacity of addressing the serious concerns of the New Veterans Charter. This is refreshing to see. Other similar entities just basically pay lip service to their mandate or cunningly restate their mandate in order to provide themselves with a means of not getting to the heart of problems, which is the original purpose for their existence. End result another bureaucratic organization lacking accountability.

May 30, 2014 11:20 AM

Sharon Godsell said:

I am not a member of the military, but have family in the military, and I strongly support the changes to be made in the New Veterans Charter. Especially changes made to the lump sum payment as it is presently laid out. I feel we should re-establish the old method of a pension fund paid to our wounded warriors who we owe so much to.

May 29, 2014 12:30 AM