It is hypocrisy to deny duty to veterans

Chemainus – It’s unfortunate that the phenomenon known to texters as TMI (Too Much Information) means news that should have caused an uproar among Canadians, entirely slipped by me.

Late last year Legion Magazine featured an article that briefly mentioned the class-action suit brought against our government by a relatively small group of modern-day veterans. I say our government, because it’s important to note that these are the people to whom WE gave the right to make vital decisions on our behalf. The suit alleges that one of those decisions, the Canadian Forces and Veterans

Re-establishment and Compensation Act, violates the rights of veterans injured in the course of their assigned military duties.

The first attempt to bring this action was denied on the basis of the contention of government lawyers that the suit had no chance of success and that it was frivolous. Since one of the claimants had lost both legs, an eardrum and a testicle while serving our government’s priorities, I’m not convinced that “frivolous” quite covers the situation. Thankfully a judge from the British Columbia Supreme Court agreed, and the suit continued.

Not being a lawyer, I won’t attempt to offer an opinion on whether the action should succeed or not. What I do take issue with is the language used by government-employed lawyers and other like-minded federal bureaucrats to deny there is just cause for the action.

Our government’s contention is that they owe no special moral or social obligation to veterans. Further, they argue, and I quote: “…there is no sacred duty owed by the government to its veterans”. That government purports to speak for you and for me.

When military action by our country results in tragic disruptions to the lives of those sent to do our bidding, it is obscene hypocrisy to deny our sacred duty to them.

Irene Hawkins

Chemainus