Re-establish lifelong pensions as an option for our injured veterans?

bosn181,

Thank you so much and I'm happy to hear you are learning things on this Forum.

Please continue to relay to other Veterans to check out this Forum, it is an excellent Forum with excellent members who have taken the time to assist others in the sharing of personal experiences and providing the help/info and assistance to one another. That is the Forums number one objective, to provide help/info to fellow Veterans resulting in Veterans having a greater chance of succeeding in getting the benefits that is available for application.

It pleases me to see Veterans helping each other on this Forum, it pleases me when I see new members joining and asking questions and getting help and or guidance, and those same new members offering that same help. This is proactive in the growing and continuation of support this Forum offers, we must not stray away from these main objectives moving forward, we must continue to work together in a respective manner to allow the continuation of the Forums proactive objectives.

I am pleased as stated in my last Forum Announcement about the way things have been transpiring on this Forum, it is the members and the team effort that is making this Forum operate in a proactive manner, I am grateful and thankful to all participants who give their own time to reach out and help others.

Keep up the good work!

trooper i can only say great things about you and this site i have learned so much from both and i always try to let as many other vets that i come in contact with to check this place out as a place with great knowledge and understanding i am sure once in a while a few may get off track and i am thankful you there to help guide them but as we all know you can take a horse to water but you can't make them drink. if they chose not to drink and be respectful i wish them all the best on getting back on the right trail and remember there are lots of lost souls that need a place like here to find there way back i know i am one of them and very happy to have found such a place here.

propat,

You need to join another site or facebook.

Half the time what you write is not understandable, you enjoy conflict like your counterpart wildthing, you say always question authority because you have no respect for authority.
You constantly complain about your freedom of rights, your rights to say and do whatever it is you want on this forum, nobody's forcing you to be a member of this forum, yes I did give you a warning, more than one, but I also let a whole lot of things slide with you in the past. No more, I am the Forum Master who runs this Forum, either you respect the entire forum by obeying the rules and the administrators, or you are history.
Your constant challenge on what I write is starting to get out of hand, your disrespect towards me is getting old and to be honest it down right shows just how Ignorant you really are.
I think most members know what this Forum stands for, they respect the Forum and respect the administrators of the Forum.
I really am getting sick and tired of you trying to force change the way this Forum runs and operates. You don't have that right and I certainly won't stand for it. In fact it's mind - boggling to have witnessed all of your challenges of this Forum in what you claim to be a violation of your freedom of rights/speech, but yet, your still here.
You must just be a shit disturber who gets bored and wants to reach out for attention by causing a disturbance on the Forum.  
I already told you what to do, or how to go about complaining about the way I run the Forum, I must say for a guy who comes on here and acts like a person who is drinking and so - so tough, you sure as hell are scared to take action against me, or are you one of those individuals who simply gets their kicks from a keyboard.
propat, you sure do miss the good old days where CSAT became a circus of chaotic arguments among members of this Forum, I do not operate that way, I made this clear from day one. If you want to continue to act like an Ignorant childish person in challenging my character, the way in which I run the Forum, pack your bags, or I'll pack them for you.
I usually don't waste my time, or the forum's time when dealing with situations like this, but since you mentioned openly about how it is you feel, I have taken the time to reflect where I stand. And just so we are clear, I have given you a written warning which I have documented, I have no problem whatsoever in deleting you from this Forum.
If I were you, I would take a hard and good look at what this Forum is all about, I would also look at the rules of the Forum.
Don't bother trying to haul me into a useless argument about what I just wrote, because what I wrote stands and I will not waste anymore of my time trying to explain myself to you!

ya like most things you say that I disagree with but let slide without comment this one has actually started burning in my mind so ill say something .

throw me off the sight if you like for NOT breaking the rules just like you gave me an official warning for doing something that did not break the rules but I have to take issue with your wording .

are you sure :

" Yes i MAY have miss read your post, "

entirely accurate ???

or was the MAY a little ( to say the least ) disingenuous ?

always question authority

propat

yes they do trooper under direction of an actual law maker ( MP ) minister or what not . in the line of their duties they just don't come up with an idea then right it up but are free to do that all they want as private citizens just like you and me .

thing is if the politicians don't want it introduced on the house floor it will not be . if they do and get it introduced by say... party A but party B is in the majority and they all hate the proposed legislation they will vote against it and the bureaucrats short of walking into the house floor fully armed cant force the law makers to vote for it .

point is blaming the bureaucrats for crap is a politicians move of last resort . they are idiots no doubt bureaucrats ends in rats for a reason . but bottom line when a bill becomes the law of the land the bureaucrats must follow it . and the ONLY people responsible for introducing and passing or not introducing and passing legislation are the politicians and THE BUCK STOPS THERE and not with the scapegoats no matter how ugly they are or how much people like making them the whipping post . well deserved for a lot of reasons sure but NOT when it comes to legislation .

always question authority

propat

Yes I may have miss read your post, but a good explanation of Legislation is good posted info.

The bureaucrats don't approve or vote in Bills, but they do write up legislation that turns into a Bill that is sent for approval.

trooper ;

what I actually said word for word .

" just a point on legislation ; only law makers can legislate no one else . so no one can be held responsible for legislation but the law makers . NO bureaucrat can force the legislators ( MOPs ) to introduce legislation they don't want and none can force them to vote for it ."

I get all you said and know very well all of that witch proves my point . ill say it again .

" NO BUREACRATS CAN FORCE LEGISLATORS ( MOP,s ) to introduce legislation they don't want and none can force them to vote for it ."

not yelling just think you might have a hard time reading the smaller print .

I in NO way shape or form said or implied that legislation couldn't be forced .

so its the lawmakers ( politicians ) or MOP,s that are responsible for ALL legislation and the ONLY ones that should be held responsible for it or for not introducing legislation that should be .

propat

propat,

The government legislates, and yes if the government is of the majority type, then yes legislation can be forced.

Legislation is written up, made a bill and sent out to be made Law.

The bureaucrats write up the legislation, the bureaucrats bring it forward to the Minister, the Minister signs off on it and is made or added to a Bill, it then goes before the Senate for passing.
Once it passes the Senate, it is then voted upon in the house, and as stated above, a majority government can force pass any legislation.

Legislation refers to written laws, often referred to as Acts or statutes, which are enacted by Parliament, the legislative arm of government. Draft legislation, called a bill, is introduced to Parliament and requires the assent of the House of Commons, the Senate and the Crown to become law.

Here is a better breakdown;

To create a new law, also called an act or a statute, the government first introduces a bill which must pass through various stages in both the House of Commons and the Senate in order to become law.

WHAT IS A BILL?
A bill is a proposed law that is introduced in either the House of Commons or the Senate. Most bills are introduced in the House of Commons. Bills can amend or repeal existing law or can contain completely new law.

There are two kinds of bills: public and private. Public bills relate to public policy and may be sponsored by a Minister (Government bill) or by a private Member (Members' bill). Private bills benefit a particular individual or group.

WHAT STAGES MUST A BILL PASS IN ORDER TO BECOME LAW?
In the First House:

The first House can be either the House of Commons or the Senate and is always the House in which the bill was introduced. If the first House is the House of Commons then the second House is the Senate and vice versa. A bill must pass through all the following stages, regardless of the House in which it was introduced, in order to become law.

1st Reading: This is a formality whereby the bill is introduced to the House. The bill is then printed in its 1st reading form, often with explanatory notes.

2nd Reading: The main principle and purpose of the bill is debated. If passed, the bill is then referred to a committee for further study. In some instances, a bill may be referred to committee prior to receiving second reading. Bills are not re-printed at 2nd reading.

Committee: Committee members study the bill clause by clause. The committee may make amendments.

Report Stage: The committee presents its report, which may recommend that the bill be accepted in its 1st reading state, or with amendments, or that it not be proceeded with further. During report stage debate, members can propose further amendments to the bill.

3rd Reading: The House reviews the bill in its final form and then orders the printing of the 3rd reading bill. The 3rd reading copy includes any amendments made to the bill thus far.

In the Second House:

Once a bill has passed the 3rd reading stage in the first House, the bill goes to the second House where it must pass through the same stages. The Senate may amend, delay or refuse to pass bills, although traditionally the Senate passes most bills. Any amendments made by the second House however, must be agreed to by the first House or the bill does not become law.

Royal Assent

Royal Assent completes the enactment process.  Bills may be given Royal Assent in two ways: by the Governor General or her deputy in a formal ceremony that takes place in the Senate before an assembly of both houses, or by written declaration.  "Where royal assent is signified by written declaration, the Act is deemed to be assented to on the day on which the two Houses of Parliament have been notified of the declaration" (Royal Assent Act, S.C. 2002, c.15, s.5).   When a bill receives Royal Assent it is given a chapter number for the Statutes of Canada.

WHEN DOES AN ACT COME INTO FORCE?
An act comes into force on the date of Royal Assent, unless the Act itself states that it comes into force on some other day. Different sections of an act can come into force on different days. An exact date may be specified or a "commencement" section may state that the Act, or certain sections of the Act, will come into force "by order of the Governor in Council". This means an order in council is required to fix the date that the Act or sections of the Act come into force. These orders in council are often referred to as proclamations. The House of Commons and Senate do not have to be sitting in order for an order in council to be issued to proclaim an act or sections of an act into force.

WHAT HAPPENS IF A BILL IS NOT PASSED?

Not all bills become law. A bill "dies on the order paper" if it does not pass through all of the stages described above during a session of Parliament. A bill that has died on the order paper can, however, be reintroduced as a new bill, with a new bill number, in the next session of Parliament.

we need a union not these advocates . the advocates for the most part are PA guys like me and thus have been very well served by the NVC very well indeed . yes their will always be eb and flows to pushes for the return of the PA pension like everything .

ya mike blais is a PA guy still out their beating the drum on this issue with no regard for grey areas or compromise just seeing right and wrong . sadly he is one of the very few .

over all the voices for this are getting more numerous and louder on all forms of media . simply because of the number of NVC vets growing . still in the minority to say the least but that will not last forever .

just a point on legislation ; only law makers can legislate no one else . so no one can be held responsible for legislation but the law makers . NO bureaucrat can force the legislators ( MOPs ) to introduce legislation they don't want and none can force them to vote for it .

if these frackers don't or cant do there job ... as in others they will need to be fired .

propat

Come election time and it seems to me that it is around the corner that this BS spin better be finalized or face being voted out of office.
The Chief Native councillor called our Hon. a serial liar, that's pretty bad.

Look at your life. Now look at his; Mr. GQ himself never once served, but yet "GQ" is the head of our military?
My daddy wasn't a politician, my daddy was an AIRBORNE, hence following in his footsteps.
Delay, deny and die should and will no longer be the case for our VETERANS!!!!
We are massing up all over social media spreading the word around of the bureaucratic system.
Who's really behind the curtains pulling the strings?
We whom served are pure Military through and through!
Never forget.

Unfortunately, the only politician who repeatedly fought for Veterans benefits, was Peter Stoffer, but even he defended the use of lump sum awards. And IMO, that was the nail in his political coffin.

I hear you Trooper...

" I'm astounded to see the lack of push by advocates regarding the lifelong pension. "


JMO but I don't particularly go for any political johnny-come-lately flash in the pan advocate.
Because over time  (sigh) ... I found it get's very draining...

That's not overlooking the sincerity of some of those advocates though.

That said, we gotta do it ourselves en masse. Smartly.

Trooper - I was actually thinking the same as you on them making the CIA some sort of life long pension. We could both be off the rails on this one. But then again who knows. I just can't imagine that on budget day, a magic fairy will say bang there's your life long pension. Especially since it's been deadly quiet on that topic all year, VVV...

From what I gather Trooper everyone is waiting for the budget. If no pension then things are going to pick up greatly. Veteran guerrilla radio has a plan to start using the game across Canada. I for one don't believe anything new will be in the budget for veterans. Just money to support there current programs. Also of concern is the report the Ombudsman plans on releasing that will show the NVC is now more generous than the old system. If government get ahold of that I doubt we will ever see any other changes benefits wise.

One thing some won't realize here either is that the Liberals have introduced Bill C27. The purpose of Bill C27 is to take away our defined pension benefits for the military, RCMP and public service. Some on here will be in receipt of a CF pension. If passed, it could mean a significant reduction in that pension.

Now, the Conservatives were the first to push for this and they stopped it when there was a great outcry. But the Liberals dusted it off.

Now, I am not against pension reform. Financially, they probably have to do it. But then those in receipt of the pension should not be harmed. Change it for people that still have 10 plus years till retirement.

Everyone here should be writing their MP and telling them to keep their paws off our defined pension benefit.