OTTAWA, ON, November 22, 2000 - The National Council of Veteran Associations stated today that an economist's report, prepared for the lawyers acting in the class action, which suggests that disabled veterans are owed up to $3.6 billion, failed to indicate that the bulk of the money, should the government settle a class action suit, would go to relatives rather than the war veterans. The report was prepared by Michael Charette, a former senior economic analyst with the Government of Canada.

"We were not impressed with the methods employed by the law firm from the very beginning, when several partners came to Ottawa with a public relations representative and asked us to appear with them at a news conference," Cliff Chadderton, Chairman of the 37-member National Council stated.

"It looked to us as if the lawyers considered it necessary to use public opinion in addition to relying on the legal aspects of their claim.

The government announced November 2, 2000, that it would appeal the decision. It would seem now that the legal firm has prepared a 52-page report to support its case.

The report suggests that the taxpayers would have to pay interest going back to 1920 should the government's appeal fail.

The 37-member National Council suggested at its annual meeting on November 8, 2000, that, inasmuch as the lawyers seem to prefer to play out their case in the public forum, Canadians should examine the major issue," Chadderton continued.

Chadderton was referring to the "set-off" principle, which has already been accepted in a Federal Court decision, meaning that, in lieu of paying interest, Veterans Affairs agreed to look after the funds of these mentally incompetent patients. Many have built up large estates over the years, in that they have been in receipt of 100% pension, allowances and free medical treatment, amounting to approximately $3,000 a month.

The objections to the lawsuit by veterans organizations are based on four facts:

• practically none of the money would go to veterans themselves;
• the taxpayer would be gouged to the tune of billions, much of which would end up in the pockets of distant relatives;
• a successful decision would undoubtedly make it more difficult to achieve some of the worthy objectives of veterans organizations, such as benefits for Ferry Command Pilots who flew the Atlantic in unarmed aircraft in World War II and received no rehabilitation benefits, and
• the publicity arising out of the claim is creating unfair criticism of the manner in which DVA has looked after these patients.