MVA says "Keep an eye on the budget"

oh pinger I very well realize that buds . he promised a lifetime pension ,that's it that's all, I get that buds and I strictly adhered to that . he only made it sound like the PA pension to get votes but was in no way AT ALL SPACIFIC about what EXACTLY the lifetime pension he was speaking of ACTALLY WAS .

SO I gave him a piece of legislation that was EXACTLY in line with his promises . the PA pension IS IN FACT a life long pension is it not ?

so im thinking if you promise a lifelong pension and make it sound like THEE life long pension to get more votes with a plan to frack people over by giving them exactly what you said but no where near what people expected .

don't be surprised if some but hole sends you legislation that accomplishes exactly what you promised and exactly what you wanted them to think to garner votes even if it was not what you were ACTUALLY going to do .

if they didn't want that to happen them maybe they should have been more specific about EXACTLY what lifelong pension they were speaking of .

OH WAIT if they were planning on fracking us all along that would have actually cost them votes .

live by the sward die by the sward .

I did give them legislation that was EXACTLY in line with their promises no matter how you look at it .

the unspecific nature of the " lifelong pension " promise , that's on them buds . they wanted people to fill in the blanks in the obvious direction to garner votes . I mirrored that same obvious direction they were leading people too when I wrote that legislation.

so frack em .

still EXACTLY in line with what they promised . just MAYBE not in line with what the actually intended to do. politicians !!!

as for me and teen it may just be me but I really think we both agree with the premise of the legislation at hand . I don't call it a disagreement but I think whats at issue between us when it comes to this matter is timing . people may thing there is some disagreement weather this will be acceptable by the GOC . not in the least . this will cost . so I don't think it will be acceptable at all but for THAT reason only .

propat

Yes I can truly have the blackest sense of humor, I;d push daisies without it.

But back to "Keeping an eye on the of Budget" (our portion).
I do not expect squat. But if that should occur, I'll be part of the peeved off.

As an aside propat, you do realize what JT proposed/promised was NOT
re-implementing age old PA lifelong pensions....
just a "blended" version of it to be seen sometime soon?

You had tits and tats with teen somewhat about that distinction and I can understand
your point of view. Unfortunately no one can shortcut GoC with everyday
simple shyte or the stroke of a pen until hell freezes bad bad.

Stay well everyone everywher bye bye:

BTW pinger I get the humor thing I love to laugh at crap like this . dark sense of humor a suppose . if I wasn't in the place I am or who I am the jokes would never end about this fracking circus freak show but given who I am and the category of the issue at hand I just cant seem to laugh at the obvious comedic opportunities this issue presents .

propat

oh pinger it can be done and IF they give an option of the PA pension it likely will be in time .

the buyout was all about saving money that's why the new fix touted is an OPTION and they are increasing the buyout in conjunction with that the more peeps they can get to take the buyout the better for them .

the combination you are putting forth say 25% buyout and 75% pension or vice versa or 50-50 would be another way to get more to take some of the buyout . so if they are going for the PA pension as an option I fully believe that would happen .

thing is I dislike having any buyout even as an option . good thing for some I get that but only as a nicety or convenience .

these options can be huge life altering pitfalls for those that end up making this hugely important decision in the limited time given to make it if they don't have their heads aint exactly screwed on tight so to speak. I just don't believe a nice little convenience for some is worth the potential risk for the most vulnerable of us. not having the buyout at all would mean the few that would take it would be forced to take the PA pension LOL poor frackers .not exactly devastating at least in my books .

I went with the option ONLY because it was in their promises for the reason I mentioned and im sure anything without it would be ignored.

not saying I wasn't ignored anyway just saying I thought my only shot was sticking STRICTLY to what they had promised that's all.

propat

Weighing in 2 cents.

Talking lump sums of NVC as opposed to the old PA lifelong pensions.
Could a blended abortion of the two be a good fix? Who know's, it's never been done.
And how long could that jury ever be out for? Survey says.....

We might have assumptions and thoughts. Well here;s a few of mine.
I ain't no tri-service politician/bureaucrat/accountant or a math wizard to see it's extremely complicated shyte.

The GoC I voted in don't know shyte about it otherwise it would have been DONE pronto pdq as promised. Tick Tock....
Yes, March 22 is on the horizon. So is the cheque in the mail.
I don't hold my breath. But JT is already spending billions into a deficit.

I happen to believe there is much more to putting a full stop on lump sums and reverting back to straight old original PA lifelong pensions.
Let alone those in between gray areas.

Be hell to pay in some corridors. If it all wasn't tragic it would really fracking amuse me.

Pinger.

I think the tax free pension portion of the PA will come back.

We may not see it come back for a long long time , but in my opinion as time passes the fight will grow stronger an stronger for this, so I would say , it's not if , but when it will come back.

I agree with Propat! His suggestion is by far the easest way to change the act. But easy is never the way of government. Trudeau will keep all his promises because he's toast come next election if he doesn't. Life long pension is coming back but I'm sure glad I'm under the pa system because I have a feeling the PA is dead, burial at sea, well be the last guys to get that.

yup that's right trooper we aint goona wait . at all . the MVA needs to show leadership bypass the bureaucrats and pass the proper legislation NOW.then its law so the fracking bureaucrats can whine and cry all they want unless they all get to vote in the legislature ore somehow get veto power they are going to have to suck it up and bash on .

yup they can drag there heals on stuff from time to time but trying to do that on a new amendment that creates no additional work and has no real learning curve would look a little ridiculous .

propat

I could be wrong here but I don't think Veterans will put up with waiting years for the lifelong pension to be brought back.

Also I don't think holding off on progress reports about the lifelong pension will wash either.

If the Bureaucrats are standing in the way , it's our MVA's job to ensure that does not happen.
Remember it was the MVA who said publicly when asked how much are you willing to spend ?
He's answer was , whatever it takes.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around how the new much ToD can pose such a problem. Veterans complained that the old ToD was too vague, leaving too much of the assessment up to the adjudicator, based on their interpretation of the evidence. So they brought in the new TOD to determines how disabled a veteran is, based on specific medical evidence, for each claimed condition. It is still possible to be assessed at higher than 100% with the new ToD. The rate of pay for the Disability Pension/Award paid for each level of disability is the same, whether that level of disability is due to one or two severe medical conditions, or several minor ones. And both the PA and the NVC capped payments at 100%. So even under the PA, a Veteran who was assessed at 105% or 150%, didn't get paid any more than someone that was assessed at 100%. To me, this is not a hard concept to grasp. 100% is 100%, is 100%. So someone who was deemed 100% after 2006, under the new ToD, should be eligible for the same pension as those who were deemed 100% before 2006.

propat you and I and everyone on CSAT see's what is happening to vets and what they can potentially lose. Unfortunately we are dealing with bureaucrats and they do not see the same way as we do.

This is the reality the veteran community is facing. Bureaucrats who do not give a fiddler's fadoo about the now.

Vets can pitch all the ideas to "bridge" the problem now all they want. It's falling on deaf ears. So unfortunately we are looking at the reality of their pace to solve problems. So they really don't give a damn if it takes 3 years.

ya know the burocrats can look at it any way they want its NOT a piece meal solution in any wat it adds NO NEW BENIFITS . the NVC witch the bureaucrats thought was great no PA pension on a single application .NOOO a whole piecemeal patchwork of benefits with a separate application form for each and when you lose one reapply for it again ore apply for income sup then reapply for ELB then fill out your re-up form for that every year or two. NOW THAT is a piece meal piece of crap if ever seen it .

or ya can call it what it really is . a make work project . how much do they make an hour????

anyway

my solution adds no new benefits or changes one benefit into a bunch of others .

it simply gives the members of the military the option to take the same benefit available to the RCMP . a benefit still being processed by DVA to this very day .

don't really care what the burocrats want unless its the same thing vets want because to me that's what really counts .

the thing is the NVC created a lawsuit MY legislation would actually END ONE .

propat

Well all I can say is the ball is in their court , they have the ability to do exactly what they promised , anything off of that will be rejected by most Veterans.
If they want to alleviate future Law Suits an future backlash , now's their chance , I doubt they'll get another chance at it.
Fix it right , or leave it for someone else to fix.

agree fully trooper thing is they have shown no signs of doing this either as a matter of fact all political colors have shown they want to keep it .

the legislation i wrote was not what i would have written given cart blanch .

it was written solely based on what they promised to do . its simply the art of the possible .

the fairest and most equal way to do it within the scope of what they promised .

propat

Yes teen yes I am and doing it in a relative heartbeat with a small amendment piece of legislation . not only that its in perfect line with what the GOC promised . what you are talking about is about a three year ordeal . great idea and should be done but its not in line with their promises .

while some disabled vets are on the verge of loosing homes families or worse . why in the heck should we wait to do the major change so we can change all the language at the same time as that particular change .

should we put off ALL the legislative changes for 3 more years like the ELB thing an such ?

I say no .

no way .

fix what needs fixing NOW before to many disabled vets lose to much.

then so vets and the staff at DVA can have an easier time understanding and implementing the programs . harmonize the two acts and merge them .

extremely convenient as a merger would be and I hope it happens I WILL NOT PUT CONVINIENCE before desperate disabled vets . AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

ya see some of the things THEY WILL lose over the next few years they WILL NOT be able to get back.

it takes NO extra time to do this first as it actually harmonizes the pain and suffering parts of the legislations up front so less work to do on it latter.

people I know have lost homes and families and one life im almost certain of over this fracking buyout .

just waiting or working on something that can take years is just something im uncomfortable with to say the least especially when it is completely  unnecessary .

the MVA,s office should carry on with their promises as stated AND tell the DOJ to start working on the harmonization of the two acts . when the DOJ is finished with that part present it to the MVA walk him through it and then they can start the amalgamation proses.

i don't think we need to put just one of the promises on hold until amalgamation  when we have absolutely no idea if it will EVER happen.

propat