Re: Study of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board Processes and Activities

[RCN-Retired]

From a Veteran that has filed several complaints with your office due to VAC and their constantly undermining the medical professionals that are taking care of me, I will believe when I see it. Thus far VAC has turned me down on pretty much everything and have made me jump through so many hurdles and appeals I have lost count but I am still fighting them and my once 40% disability is now 97% and climbing due to the manner in which my family and I am treated by VAC. They ARE NOT for the veteran and until the Government gives your office the proper authority and not the ability to fire you if the PM does not like what you are saying they (the government) will always get away with their dirty work.

[Teentitan]

Ottawa - October 30, 2012
Yesterday I appeared before the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs to provide my testimony about the Veterans Review and Appeal Board (the Board) processes and activities.
There, I spoke of the need for increased transparency throughout the review and appeal process – from hiring of Board members to the publishing of decisions. A full account of my testimony is available here.
I am pleased that the Committee has undertaken to review the Board’s processes and activities. In fact, the Committee’s decision to review the processes of the Board was made shortly after the Office published an Analysis of Federal Courts decisions pertaining to the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, the Veterans' Right to Fair Adjudication. I am hopeful that the work of the Committee will result in improvements to the Board’s operations, ensuring fairness in the redress process.

The main finding of our study is that in 60% of the 140 Board decisions reviewed by the Federal Court, the Court ruled that the Board erred in law or fact, or failed to observe principles of procedural fairness. This clearly suggests that improvements to how the Board makes decisions are needed.
Considering the sheer number of decisions rendered by Veterans Affairs Canada on disability benefits each year, mistakes can be made. It is important to have an independent, specialized quasi-judicial body that Veterans and members of the Canadian Forces and the RCMP can turn to for redress when they are not satisfied with the decisions made by the Department.
This study by the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs is a positive step toward changes for a fairer and more transparent Board in which Veterans can trust. I look forward to reading the resulting report and will be sure to share a copy once it is completed.
Guy

http://www.ombudsman-veterans.gc.ca/blog-blogue/post-eng.cfm?177