OUR GOC IS AT IT AGAIN! If you have children under 17, pls read

Yes the foundation of beauracrats with the oppostion parties throughout the last 50 years has been solid.

Only problem is bureaucrats don't care who the oppostion is because if they become the sitting power bureaucrats have zero problem flipping on the party that was once the opposition.

They are very fickle.

Yep. If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all. But oh lordy tffm, you can't play nice with vac!!! You have to play dirty with them at the get go. Sad but true. aka Same old snafu.

I understand that the bureaucracy at VAC can be obstructive, but after years of working on behalf of Veterans, and in the last few years, also being the VAC Union members biggest ally in the HoC. He was the loudest political voice when the VAC offices were closed. He has been the loudest critic of all the firings of staff, and of how little the new hirings will actually be effective. So I think that if he does become the MVA, he can only build on an already strong foundation of working with the bureaucracy of VAC.

agreed trooper mr O,tool could be a good one given the reigns to the file but we all knew going in he would never have them.

as for the rest you are also correct given the numbers as they stand RIGHT NOW it is highly unlikely any party will form a majority and no MVA of any party will have an easy go of it to say the least. so certainly we will have to have patience with whoever it is .

but I do have a couple of points to add to that particular subject .

1. Canadians in general do tend to show support for disabled vets so any stand alone bills to improve vets benefits is unlikely to see a lot of opposition from opposition parties so whatever party forms the government will likely be able to make some headway if they stick to stand alone bills . the problem is these parties know how Canadians feel about there disabled vets and use that politically at times . if they have trouble with other legislation or anticipate it the may add improved vets benefits to other crap or a whole pile of other crap trying to improve the chances the other stuff passing but putting at risk the vets part of the legislation.

2. just on MR Stoffer given his well deserved standing among the vet community im kinda thinking he will probably receive a little more patience and understanding if things are moving a little or lot slower in a minority than any of the possible selections from the other two parties .

propat

Teen absolutely the bureaucrats , I totally agree with that point an thank you for pointing it out.
The bureaucrats , the ones all Veterans can thank for the NVC !

propat too true I'm almost certain that if Mr. O'Toole was given more leeway from Mr. Harper - he Mr. O'Toole would have been able to accomplish , much much more in a more effective way an in a more widespread manner to affect more Veterans then what he has brought forward thus far.
These tight leash methods by the PM may end up playing a role in him not being re - elected.

I also agree that if the NDP do form the next government , it is highly unlikely it will be of the majority type.
And to follow up on teen's point about the bureaucrats , they will have to find a way to keep the bureaucrats under control - in other words ensure that the bureaucrats are reminded who they work for , an who they answer too , an who has the final say on the set rules.

I would say the relevance of point # 2 would show that if Mr. Stoffer does become our new MVA an his government does not hold a majority - which is highly unlikely that they will , we the Veterans have to understand that even though Mr. Stoffer is going to be well embraced by the Veterans at large , an is going to bring forward some " Major Changes / Improvements / an Implementations " it is more than likely not going to be cut an dry - or absolute , you can rest assure road blocks will come in the form of the opposition.
Just thought I would point that out in the case that he does become our MVA , just to be clear I'm all for Mr. Stoffer becoming our MVA , just wanted to point out a few things that may jump into's Mr. Soffer's way in his quest to implement changes.

great point teen but again applies equally to all parties im just glad they don't let them vote in the house with the elected members then we would be truly fracked.

propat

trooper certainly two good points to think about for sure.

point 1. is certainly one to think about when trying to select a party you know what ya got with the cons the real MVA is harper.

the libs well Justin doesn't seem to have the skills to manage that BUT Gerald butts seems to be playing the game exactly like dingwall did so this is just speculation but im thinking he WILL be keeping people in line and on point at all times.

in contrast the NDP seem to have some freedoms to speak for themselves and mulcair seems that he would prefer to delegate to his members their own responsibilities at least right now .so again speculation.

so I guess its really what you want from your party.

point 2.cirtinly an extremely relevant point as whatever party wins may find themselves in that very situation with the NDP only 3 points up on the cons right now and the libs only 5 points behind the cons . yup you can say the NDP is the most likely to form a majority and the libs the least likely yes I get that but with the numbers RIGHT NOW its unlikely anyone will.

however this point seems irrelevant when trying to choose a party as it seems at least to me right now as it applies to all parties evenly but yes keep it in mind as this can very well change in the future.

propat

Great post trooper but if I may add a third point...

3. Dealing with bureaucrats

Bureuacrats are the ones who can really throw the proverbial monkey wrench into the gears of change.

I've dealt with them more and more over the the last 5/6 years and believe me when I say this....

They play nice with politiicians until the politicians until they (the politicians) make them do something they don't want to do.

A Minister has a staff of maybe a dozen people. VAC has a staff of 3500 people. So who do you think knows the rules and regulations better then the politician???

It's a very delicate juggling act. I've had former staffers and MP's tell me that it's hard to push an agenda that the bureaucrats don't like.

Guys, remember that tune,Don't stop believing, believe , if we don't believe than we have nothing. It's been forever that veterans have been in darkness at this point I'm hoping that there's light at the end of the tunnel!

Teen, I believe it was bill C-201 which Bigrex is referring to a link can be found here:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Bill=C201&Parl=40&Ses=3

Notes:
The Bill did not receive a Royal Recommendation and, pursuant to Standing Order 79, the Order for third reading was discharged and the item was dropped from the House of Commons' Order Paper.

Here is another on bill history ect:  
http://users.eastlink.ca/~clawback1/page-001.htm



Cheer's

Again great points of views - Looking at it solely on if the NDP gets elected , an solely how this could affect Veterans moving forward , again just talking about Veterans here , leaving all other issues aside.
It is of no surprise that besides having a new form government in power (NDP) , Peter Stoffer is the key individual that Veterans would be looking to bring forward
" Major Positive Changes To Veterans "
Changes that are significant to all Veterans that would result in " Major Improvements "

The following is my own personal observation, thoughts , an perspective - or outlook on Mr. Stoffer;
Firstly do I think Mr. Stoffer would be good - an do good things - offer Major positive changes for our Veterans if he became our MVA ?
My answer to that is simply this - absolutely !
I like many others have witness first hand what Mr. Stoffer is capable of in his hard work an dedication towards helping " ALL VETERANS "
And to make a point here , Mr. Stoffer has accomplished this all while he is an official NDP MP opposition party position , Just imagine the progress this man could accomplish as our MVA in an NDP run government.
I have a great deal of respect for this man , an I'm confident that he is a man that acts an speaks from the heart , so I would welcome him as our MVA.
I also witnessed him publicly on public television that " ALL VETERANS " should be given the benefit of doubt when applying for benefits , an issue that has come to light as of late with the present government.
So in my own opinion - or view I see him as a man with good intentions towards helping " ALL VETERANS " this he has already proven  as the MP Official Opposition Critic for Veterans Affairs , along with following these good intentions, he also followed up with some solid direct actions , so if he can accomplish that in his current role , I cannot see why he could not continue that same path as our MVA ,  perhaps with more positive improvements given that new role.

Having said all that I think it's important to understand a few things before we break out the champagne in the event that the NDP does get elected an Peter Stoffer does become our new MVA.
I will name two of them ;
1. Regardless of which party is governing the Country , an regardless the MVA , the MVA's success is highly dependent on this important factor , how long of a leash will the PM allow his MVA ?
It can be difficult for any MVA to perform his duties if the PM does not allow him the space to perform any such duties.
2. Another problem that could lead to road blocks for an MVA is if the governing party in power is of a minority government.
This can lead to slowing the process for improvement changes which also can lead to positive changes not being implemented.

So bottom line here is that yes the NDP sure looks an sounds good for the future of Veterans , an like I have said in one of my above post , I will not say no to given the NDP a chance , but with some caution that it may not be so cut an dry as we want to believe it to be.

Was it about the clawback of our pensions at 65? Because if it was that is one explanation "bridging" as confusing as string theory.

Teen it was the NDP's Five Points Motion, so not legislation per say, but it still went through the same rigorous process. Apparently, anything that requires royal assent needs to be recommended by a cabinet minister, so without that recommendation, it just dies on the order paper.

Rex I'm trying to figure out which Bill you are referring to? It's my understanding that any bill that goes thru all levels of voting and passes has to go for Royal Ascent.

The only way I understand Bills don't is if an election is called.

like I said im in for now long time till the election though. I stiil need to see if anyone else will have something better to say if anything at all.  nav ya got a point first time your party has ever held  government would not be the time to be going back on promises and fracking things all up never really considered that before but it is a valid point.

but still im very cautious about politicians promises of any color and really I think not a lot will blame me for that and some may very well understand why .

but hell ill give them the rope ill give them all the rope they need and if they hang themselves with it well we may be having a much different discussion next election.

I do have hope had it before and got disappointed so its cautious but its hope just the same .

its probably a final hope politically speaking when it comes to vets issues .

I mean the other two parties will not give back what the took and if these guys do not we are politically fracked  and its off to court we go .

propat