Fantino: An Open Letter

Sir,

On 07 April, 2014 at 8:03 PM on Twitter you tweeted “Disappointed that Union of Veterans Affairs Employees financing Veterans groups with secret "War Fund."”  You then provided a link to the House Publications that serves as an online record of evidence provided by witnesses.  

Julian Fantino @JulianFantino 

Disappointed that Union of Veterans Affairs Employees financing Veterans groups with secret "War Fund."http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspxLanguage=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=2&DocId=6493940&File=0…

You sir, have abused parliamentary committee testimony for political gain. You sir, have disgraced an element of democracy that is vital to the welfare of Canada.  If Prime Minster Harper had a shred of competence he would fire you from the Conservative caucus before you have a chance to resign. 

Let me be very clear on why you need to be removed.  The concept behind Parliamentary Committee testimony is to inform and educate MPs.  The primary benefit of parliamentary testimony for MPs is maintaining contact with the population and avoiding the groupthink of the Ottawa “bubble”. 

Individuals and organizations take time and effort to prepare for an appearance before any Parliamentary Committee.  Canadians appear because they care and/or have a vested interest in the committee’s business.  Canadians feel they are partaking in an important role in our democracy.  Most Canadians believe that MPs on committees are interested in what is brought before them. 

You sir, obviously have a different position.  You have proven that political gain is you objective.  Furthermore, you have indicated that Parm Gill MP is your willing toady.  Gill sifts the dirt and you fling it at those who have taken a bullet for you. 

Why would the wounded, families, individual veterans, experts, or Veteran Organizations bother to provide evidence if it is to be abused or used for political gain?

Any politician who would use testimony before a Parliamentary Committee as a source of a political attack does not deserve to hold office.

Please do the honourable thing and resign.

Sincerely,

David T. MacLeod CD MA

Fire Fantino from Jim Newton on Vimeo.

It’s time to reconsider service delivery at Veterans Affairs Canada

Monday, March 31, 2014 The Hill Times Page11

It’s time to reconsider service delivery at Veterans Affairs Canada

(Photo) Too often, structural changes are proposed to deal with problems that are actually the symptoms of a much larger issue.

(Photo) The Hill Times photograph by Jake Wright

Veterans Ombudsman Guy Parent says the outcomes often experienced by veterans who are denied benefits, after having gone through the entire application and appeal process, are a symptom of problems rooted in the application process itself. If we fixed the front end of the process, we would reduce the effort (and cost) currently expended to provide the various levels of appeal at the end of the process.

By VETERANS OMBUDSMAN GUY PARENT
Published: Monday, 03/31/2014 12:00 am EDT
Last Updated: Monday, 03/31/2014 12:12 am EDT

OTTAWA—Too often, structural changes are proposed to deal with problems that are actually the symptoms of a much larger issue. Concerning problems with service delivery at Veterans Affairs Canada, we need to deal with the root causes and, to do that effectively, we need to understand the end state we are trying to achieve.  Simply going for structural change, as proposed by Michel Drapeau and Joshua Juneau in their Jan. 13, 2014 article in The Hill Times, where they put forward the need to create a new administrative oversight body, may justify the existence of such a new organization, but would it be any more effective than the current structure if we haven’t addressed the root causes of today’s problems? I don’t think so.

The support of veterans and their families through effective and fair access to benefits—regardless of where or when one served—should be a priority for Canada. Since the current way of doing business is not generating the results needed to resolve the problems facing veterans and their families, we need to change our vision of the future and tackle the problem of service delivery head-on at the root level.

I believe that the structural elements necessary to effectively deliver benefits and services to veterans are in place today, but the system continues to fail some of our veterans for two primary reasons.  The first reason is addressed in my report on the New Veterans Charter and concerns the shortcomings in three Charter program areas: financial, vocational rehabilitation and assistance, and family support. The second reason is a complex, multi-layered and outdated service delivery process.  

The outcomes often experienced by veterans who are denied benefits, after having gone through the entire application and appeal process, are a symptom of problems rooted in the application process itself.  If we fixed the front end of the process, we would reduce the effort (and cost) currently expended to provide the various levels of appeal at the end of the process.  

Specifically, if applicants had a clear understanding of application requirements; if they received full disclosure on what documentation the decision maker was considering; if they were consulted in the process when documentation was not sufficient, and; if they received very clear and understandable reasons for decisions that showed the logic for the decision, we would likely see a reduction in the number of reviews and appeals.  

Indeed, I have reported on this in the past and emphasized that Veterans Affairs Canada and the Veterans Review and Appeal Board should be focusing on finding ways of making the right benefit adjudication decision on the first application based on liberally interpreting legislation, rather than expending effort (and cost) on perfecting the appeal process. 

Let’s expand on this further.

Once service relationship has been established, what would happen if Veterans Affairs Canada started accepting veterans’ documentation at the front end of the process at face value and applied a presumption that military service has an impact on veterans and their family, that the majority of veterans are honest and that medical professionals are qualified to provide the appropriate substantiation. Would the benefit adjudication process fall apart? I doubt it. 

If the criteria are clearly communicated and a medical professional provides a diagnosis, why does every application need to be scrutinized further in the minutest detail? This level of examination for every application is slowing down the application process for all veterans and affecting access for many eligible veterans on the off chance that someone may not qualify for a benefit. 

Is that fair? 

Without getting into the mechanics of how this would work, let’s look at this idea conceptually. How would Canadians like it if the Canadian Revenue Agency made no presumptions when citizens file their income tax return? If they weren’t afforded some presumptions it would be a long, drawn out process for everyone with an audit on all of their filed information before a decision could be made. We’re talking months, if not years, on the adjudication of one tax year alone. I don’t think many Canadians would be happy with this scenario. Do you? So, why are veterans subjected to such scrutiny by the Veterans Affairs Canada’s service delivery application process?

I suggest that Veterans Affairs Canada adopts a system similar to that used for the Canada Pension Plan, Employment Insurance, or the Canada Revenue Agency whereby if the documentation criteria are met, benefits are provided and periodic audits are done on files to ensure quality control and to detect any fraudulent applications. In fact, this approach is already being used by Veterans Affairs Canada in some areas of service delivery, such as health-related travel or the Veterans Independence Program, so why not for the application process of other benefits?

And, I’ll go further. 

I believe that the current system of veterans’ legislation is too complex. Generations of legislation have been piled on top of the other without sufficient attention to simplifying the complexity of this legislative build-up. Complexity is costly and at a time of economic restraint, would it not make sense to stop tinkering with individual components, collapse legislation and adopt a plain language approach.  

In addition, is it not time for Veterans Affairs Canada to begin to truly liberally interpret legislation, as it is meant to do? Is it not time that the Canadian Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Canada services and benefits are better aligned so that the transition from military service to civilian life is much less complex than it is today?  Something as simple as starting a Veterans Affairs Canada file the moment a member joins the Canadian Armed Forces, conducting a direct transfer of files when a service person transitions from the Canadian Armed Forces to Veterans Affairs Canada, and providing a veterans identification card when a service person leaves, could be major enablers to improve how services and benefits are provided.

Last fall, the Veterans Consultation Group called on the Government of Canada to have a “heroic moment” and do what is right for our veterans and their families. Now is the time to move forward and reconsider service delivery at Veterans Affairs Canada.  

Finding better ways to support our veterans and their families is not impossible, but it does require a change in our vision of the future. The gaps that need to be addressed in the current suite of benefits have been identified and validated in my report on the New Veterans Charter. We need to make these changes and then move forward with a new vision of service delivery at Veterans Affairs Canada. Anything less is a disservice to veterans and their families and Canadian taxpayers.

The time for action is now. The future awaits us. 

Guy Parent is Canada’s Veterans Ombudsman.

news@hilltimes.com

The Hill Times

 

Lucille Hodgins

Media Relations and Parliamentary Affairs Advisor

Office of the Veterans Ombudsman

Tel: 613-943-7884

Cell: 613-617-7205

The Spitirt of Denial at VRAB - great job Dave!

Veteran Watch is a collection (not organization) of like-minded veterans willing to take the time and effort to conduct meaningful research into the welfare of veterans. What Veteran Watch provides as evidence is well-researched and credible.  In this case, if the government cannot ensure and effective VRAB; Veteran Watch will document and comment.  

As the author of the attached document I give all recipients permission to disseminate to the public, other organizations, and the media.  See here for the document: http://bit.ly/1gmEwXq Given the concerns voiced by the OVO, Parliamentary Committee and, most importantly, Veterans it was appropriate to conduct a review of VRABs behaviours. Peter MacKay MP and opposition members were included in the original email as the Department of Justice has a stake in the effective functioning of Federal Boards.

The report provided is the first of three that concern VRAB. The report indicates that VRAB has not adequately responded to the criticisms made by both the Parliamentary Committee and the OVO.  Instead it indicates that VRAB has paid mere lip service or "spun" its responses.  The second report is in production and examines how VRAB responds to Federal Court decisions.  The third report examines how Veterans perceive their treatment by VRAB.  Data collection of the third report has only recently begun.  

The effective functioning of VRAB directly affects every veteran who potentially requires the services of VAC. Those veterans adversely affected by the New Veterans Charter will feel the negative effects mentioned in this report more sharply than the rest of the veteran population.  

The original recipients of the email were politicians - they we sent their copies mere minutes before you.  Separate emails with the same content will be disseminated to elements of the media.  

Please direct all questions to the undersigned.

Sincerely,

David T. MacLeod CD MA

Veteran Watch

veteranwatch.blogspot.ca

@veteranwatch

902 482-0753

Veteran Watch: Fantino and the Social Contract

Veteran Watch: Fantino and the Social Contract: Fantino spoke about the  social contract  with veterans in a CBC interview.  Government lawyers have stated that no social contract exists ....

Veteran Reaches Out for Meds, VAC turns their back

It has come to my attention that a Veteran who is being treated by a Psychologist that is approved and paid for by VAC, has been denied Meds that this Psychologist and his family doctor suggested that he start taking due to the pensioned condition that he has been battling for many years.

VAC has denied those Meds.  Disgusting you bet.  But it gets worse and a bit complicated, but then again isn't everyones case a bit complex at times.

This Veteran fought a battle for 13 years with VAC to finally win last year.  He won finally in Aug 2012.  He had been put in for Depression due to the daily battles that his condition comes with, and was referred to the OSI Clinic in 2011.  The OSI Clinic stated that his depression was due to this condition, but because it was not a pensioned condition until Aug 2012, in March 2012 VAC came back denying his Depression as a sanctioned condition.

Fast forward to today, where his VAC Psychologist has determined that his Depression is from Severe to Moderate and that he should be on Meds.  He complies, goes to his family doctor, and his family doctor agrees as well.  The Family doctor even writes on the prescription that it is due to his now pensioned condition.  VAC denys the Meds because this is "consequential" to his pensioned condition and not that he actually has an approved Depression condition. Thanks for your support VAC.

Now this Veteran has to go back to the OSI Clinic to get them to rewrite the report unnecessarily all over again because of how the timeline feel, and currently VAC is turning their back on him, because that is their policy. Thanks VAC.

Minister Fantino do you have an alternative to the unaccountable VRAB Board?

Minister Fantino,

Thank you for reviewing my request but I do not trust and have no faith in Larlee given his previous misleading letters, misleading presentation to Parliamentary/ Senate Committee's and not being held accountable for inappropriately spending taxpayers money in trips to England. 

Do you have an alternative solution?

The Board that you are hiding behind and using as an excuse not to do the right thing has already ignored one specialist's report, and I do not trust them even though a second doctor has backed the first one up.  Those I have now uploaded to my VAC file and are also here http://bit.ly/1dR6K9P

The assessment that was done on my case initially after I finally won after 13 years, was done on a report for winning my case, and I was not told by BPA to have him speak to the table of disabilities as I had not won yet.  When I did win, I was not brought in as expected by your department for an assessment as I should have been, and as I stated the doctor's more specific report was completely ignored by the non medical VRAB Board members.

Again, I ask you do you have an alternative other than the unaccountable VRAB Board?

You would think that with the recent suicides that you would treat this seriously rather than denying me depressive Meds as your department recently has done.

http://bit.ly/1bsy6Sy

Captain (Retired) Jim Newton

4 Therapists Quit Edmonton OSI Clinic

Dec.5th.2013.
Mr. Peter Stoffer M.P.P. 

Dear Sir; 

          It is with heavy heart and dismay that I write this letter. How many more soldiers have to die at the hands of the current Government before those responsible for the deaths of the four young men who found life too painful to cope because of their PTSD? 

I was referred to the Edmonton OSI clinic. In Aug of 2013 for assessment and treatment for my diagnosed PTSD.  Everything  was going well with my weekly sessions until  early  Nov. 2013 when at the beginning of the session I was advised that my therapist and three others including the Manager had Quit their jobs in protest of the treatment and restrictions put on them while working with Veterans. 

At no time in the history of OSI have four therapists in one location Quit their jobs because of the poor treatment of Veterans and the therapist trying to help them. It is unheard of four therapists quitting their job in protest of the Veterans Treatment.   

As you may recall this time last year one soldier attempted to light a member of VRAB on fire in Edmonton at the local Veteran Affairs Office. VAC was warned that more and more soldiers would end up hurting themselves and others and yet nothing was done to help them. 

I was asked not to write or reveal what happened at the Edmonton OSI but I can no hold it in anymore. 

I trust that the God of the soldiers who took their own lives will take care of their souls and family and perhaps at the next election all Veterans will vote  to remove the Government who says over and over we have put five billion in to treating soldiers which is just not true. 

I am writing this with my name because I can no longer keep it a secret as requested. 

Murray Scott
Edmonton Alberta
A 47 year old proud Veteran. 



Also see how injured Veterans are being tossed to the curb