[Newsbot]

Title: Ottawa revives Harper-era legal arguments to block pensions for injured vets
Category: Political
Posted By: OnTheIce
Date: 2016-06-16 04:52:11
Canadian

[OnTheIce]

Veterans turn sights on Liberals after 94-year-old man rejected for hospital bed

http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2016/0 ... 2LZ_LsrKUl

[BartSimpson]

$1:

The department recanted that position, but then on Monday rejected the frail man for Camp Hill on the basis that he could receive adequate care at existing provincial facilities.

How is no care better than whatever they can provide?

[BeaverFever]

Not good, JT. Smarten up!

[Freakinoldguy]

Not going to happen.

I can't remember who but, some political pundit put it in perspective when he said. The Liberals campaign as Liberals but, rule as Conservatives.

So, given this latest example of another broken promise towards those he promised to help, the pundits analogy was 100% accurate.

[BeaverFever]

$1:

The Liberals campaign as Liberals but, rule as Conservatives.

That was certainly true of Chretien/Martin and was said often of them.

[Strutz]

A politician broke a campaign promise? Say it isn't so!

$1:

Moreover, all parties voted unanimously in favour of a motion introduced by NDP MP Fin Donnelly last May, which recognized a "stand-alone covenant of moral, social, legal and fiduciary obligation exists between the Canadian people … and members of the Canadian Armed Forces who have been injured, disabled or died as a result of military service."

Don Sorochan, the lawyer representing the veterans, said it would be the height of hypocrisy if the Liberal government now rejects those principles in court.

But government lawyers will do exactly that, according to their memorandum, arguing that the resolution was largely symbolic and does not oblige the government to provide pensions to injured veterans.

Symbolic? Really?

[llama66]

meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Canada's long tradition of screwing the vets continues.

[Freakinoldguy]

I'll say it again just like I did when the Conservative pulled this bullshit.

They may not have a legal obligation to Veterans like they claim but, they sure as fuck have a MORAL one and they should be held accountable for the lies they used to bilk the same people they`re now trying to throw by the side of the road.

I guess we shouldn`t be surprised that the promises were broken so quickly though.

0:

That awesome moment - When someone is lying and you know the truth.jpg [ 36.39 KiB | Viewed 628 times ]

[bootlegga]

$1:

Moreover, all parties voted unanimously in favour of a motion introduced by NDP MP Fin Donnelly last May, which recognized a "stand-alone covenant of moral, social, legal and fiduciary obligation exists between the Canadian people … and members of the Canadian Armed Forces who have been injured, disabled or died as a result of military service."

Don Sorochan, the lawyer representing the veterans, said it would be the height of hypocrisy if the Liberal government now rejects those principles in court.

But government lawyers will do exactly that, according to their memorandum, arguing that the resolution was largely symbolic and does not oblige the government to provide pensions to injured veterans.

If the Liberals support this, it'll be just as disgusting as when Harper's government supported this crap. It'll be even worse in my opinion as the current Minister of Veteran's Affairs is disabled himself!

Canada certainly does have an obligation to support anyone who is injured/disaled/killed in service to our country.

[Strutz]

bootlegga bootlegga:

$1:

Moreover, all parties voted unanimously in favour of a motion introduced by NDP MP Fin Donnelly last May, which recognized a "stand-alone covenant of moral, social, legal and fiduciary obligation exists between the Canadian people … and members of the Canadian Armed Forces who have been injured, disabled or died as a result of military service."

Don Sorochan, the lawyer representing the veterans, said it would be the height of hypocrisy if the Liberal government now rejects those principles in court.

But government lawyers will do exactly that, according to their memorandum, arguing that the resolution was largely symbolic and does not oblige the government to provide pensions to injured veterans.

If the Liberals support this, it'll be just as disgusting as when Harper's government supported this crap. It'll be even worse in my opinion as the current Minister of Veteran's Affairs is disabled himself!

Canada certainly does have an obligation to support anyone who is injured/disaled/killed in service to our country.

Absolutely.

Why this would even be questioned is beyond me.

Our Government always seems to be able to come up with money to give aid to other countries, which is very nice and noble, yet appears to hesitate to assist those who have given so much of themselves both physically and mentally to serve their country in conflicts that are not of our doing? It doesn't make any sense.