October 26, 2003

The Honourable Dr. Rey Pagtakhan, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Veterans Affairs
House of Commons
Ottawa ON K1A 0A6

Re: DISCONTINUATION OF VIP FOR WIDOWS WHOSE HUSBANDS DIED BEFORE MAY 12TH OF THIS YEAR (WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THOSE WIDOWS WHOSE VIP WAS BEING CARRIED FOR ONE YEAR AS PROVIDED IN THE REGULATIONS) 

Dear Minister:

You are possibly wondering why I did not attempt to meet with you personally on this issue.

Firstly, I must plead physical inability. I have been undergoing eye surgery and although did attend a meeting of Hamilton Southam's Valiants Committee on October 23, 2003, I had to take an attendant with me.

Also, if you care to check my military record you will see that I suffered a through-and-through wound in my right knee, in addition to the amputation and other gunshot wounds. The knee problem continues to bother me. The physician caring for veterans in Ottawa told me in 1997 that the problem could probably be resolved by removing my right kneecap. You must understand that I refused this treatment and will shortly be going back to the doctor in Florida who has successfully treated me in the past.

I have usually paid for all my medical expenses arising out of being twice wounded in Normandy. I have considered it more practical to have numerous surgeries carried out in the United States on a "self-pay" basis.

NOW TO GET TO THE MAIN ISSUE.

In the House on Friday, October 24th, you referred to letters of endorsement from the Legion and ANAVETS.

I have no intention of getting into an argument, but even the President of the Royal Canadian Legion is a civilian and had no military service.

On the other hand, for the most part, the Executive Officers of NCVA all served in World War II, and many have Gallantry Decorations.

The problem which affected me mostly was that in the Government Orders, Bill C-50 of October 24, 2003, you quoted letters of support from Allan Parks of the Legion and Bob Cassels of ANAVETS. You neglected to say that these letters had been prompted in a telephone conversation with your Deputy Minister. 

More to the point, you neglected to make any mention in the House of my intervention in the matter. It was through the Deputy Minister. I have always worked with the Deputy Ministers first which sometimes avoids further complications.

Your file obviously contained a copy of my letter to you and the news release dated September 17, 2003 in which I suggested that the action of the Department failed, in particular, in regard to the continuation of widows' pensions if more than one year had expired after the veterans' death.

You were honest in saying that your directions were that, and I quote, "no new money would be available."

This appeared to end, for the time being, our long-standing campaign, backed by Members of the Opposition and your own party, to establish a better equality between widows' pensions and the amount paid to a single male pensioner while alive.

We took the matter to court but realized that the Bill of Rights, in particular, stood in the way of the Courts creating legislation.

I take this opportunity, however, of reminding you that in our discussions, including those with your Deputy Minister, Jack Stagg, and your former Deputy Minister, Vice Admiral Murray, we continued to press for some additional pension for widows - - be it the continuation of VIP for life.

We were speaking only for the "top-end" widows - - in other words those who had sacrificed most of their adult life to provide medical and other care for severely wounded veterans.

It may have seemed harsh for you that I should call for your resignation. I was of the opinion that this might at least enlist a response to the three letters I sent to you; in particular, I make reference to the document containing the medical problems of the majority of our members.

I also take this opportunity of reminding you that, because of the inability of the Government to act, we had to adopt a policy, commencing in 1985, of providing $200 a month ($100 if in an apartment or condominium) to our widows from our own Trust Funds.

It is true that the new legislation was drafted after consultation with veterans organizations. I believe it was improper for you not to have indicated to the House, however, that NCVA had some objections (conveyed to your Deputy Minister).

Sincerely,

H. Clifford Chadderton, CC, O.Ont., OStJ, CLJ, CAE, DCL, LLD
Chief Executive Officer
HCC/dp