The reason is obvious: Liberal stock has fallen, while Tory fortunes have risen, on the issue of terrorism. Threats to Canada’s security have changed the public’s mood — maybe even the ballot question — in the run-up to this year’s election. For a government that needed a distraction from an uncertain economy, ethical lapses and voters’ natural appetite for change after nine years, the timing could not have been better.
So here’s the irony: While terrorism is good business for the Tories, they continue to fail the people who fought it on the frontlines — Canada’s veterans.
Just last week, the case of former master corporal Paul Franklin, who lost both legs in Afghanistan, made news again for all the wrong reasons. Franklin’s defenders, including comedian Rick Mercer, tore Veterans Affairs Canada to shreds in early 2015 for demanding that the former soldier prove every year that his legs were still missing, to qualify for a government-funded wheelchair.
So Pierre Lemieux, parliamentary secretary to the Veterans Affairs minister, announced on February 27 a mindbogglingly insensitive change in policy: Franklin and similarly disabled vets will instead have to provide proof every three years that they are still disabled — that their missing limbs have not miraculously grown back. If they don’t, the federal government could, for example, repossess their wheelchairs — as it has done to Franklin twice in the past.
Then there’s the recent case of former Windsor reservist Robyn Young. While serving for four years as a full-time soldier, she suffered from chronic nausea, headaches and double vision — common symptoms of a brain tumour. Despite complaining of these problems, she was not diagnosed until after she had cut back her military service, a situation which prompted a “quality-of-care review” by the Canadian Forces. In short, she’s technically not eligible for Veterans Affairs coverage for costs of drugs and therapy — which would have been paid had she received a timelier diagnosis. In February, Ottawa quietly started paying the $1,000 per month cost of her ongoing treatment — money her family says she should have received from the get-go, and for which they are still fighting.
Also in the past week, the public learned that the Tories had shelved a survey of veterans’ satisfaction with government services. Last conducted in 2010, VAC’s “national client survey” found that while veterans of older conflicts were generally satisfied with the department’s performance, vets who served in more recent conflicts such as Afghanistan were not. Satisfaction levels among those modern-day veterans had dropped from 80 per cent in 2007 to 68 per cent in 2010.
The survey was scheduled to be repeated in 2012-13. That never happened. The government decided to skip it — an irresponsible decision for several reasons. When a study shows a marked decline in satisfaction, it’s a good idea to conduct a follow-up to find out if what you’re looking at is a blip or a trend. And the Conservatives have profoundly changed the way services are delivered to vets by closing offices and moving to a Service Canada and online access model; one would assume Ottawa would want to know how that’s working out.
And just from the perspective of cynical politics, wouldn’t a sensible government want to get ahead of the problems in Veterans Affairs, for once? For despite swapping the hapless Julian Fantino for the more affable Erin O’Toole, and despite increasing allocations in recent government estimates to veterans’ disability awards and benefits, more bad decisions by VAC still risk turning the department into the Tories’ Achilles’ heel — and rightly so.
The Conservatives talk a good war. They need to prove they can do a better job of taking care of those who fight our wars for us, after they come home.
Original Article
Source: ipolitics.ca/
Author: Tasha Kheiriddin
No comments:
Post a Comment