The current controversy regarding the masculine impression in the words of our National Anthem (in all thy son's command, etc...) draws attention to the financial situation facing war widows; i.e. inequality with the male serviceman-husband.

This was the main topic of conversation among the 250 widows who participated in the recent National Biennial Seminar of The War Amps of Canada, held in Toronto August 6 - 11, 2001.

The issue is disarmingly simple. The monthly pension for these widows - - all of whose pre-deceased husbands were in receipt of maximum pension and allowances - - is $1,365. Conversely, the maximum for a 100% disability pensioner (mostly male) is $1,821. The war widow is expected to subsist on 25% less than her male counterpart. (Interesting, isn't it? Should the wife pre-decease her husband, he would be paid at the 100% rate of $1,821). Admittedly, the male carried the disability, but the wife spent most of her life as the caregiver.

The figures above are basic rates only. In addition, when the pensioner was alive, he would be in receipt of Exceptional Incapacity and Attendance Allowances totalling another $1,887; thus on the death of the pensioner, the family income would decrease from $4,164 to $1,365. Imagine the plight of the widow who must suffer an immediate drop in her living standard of $2,800 a month.

What about equal rights between men and women? We took the matter to Gerald Merrithew, Minister of Veterans Affairs, and were told in a letter dated May 8, 1991: "No Government funding available." We then placed the issue before the Human Rights Commission and were advised to go to the Courts. The Ontario Court (General Division) on January 20, 1994, decided that the legislation could not be changed by a court. This was upheld by the Ontario Court of Appeal in a Judgement dated December 1, 1997. In other words, the Justices said: "Get the Act changed." The War Amps is currently developing a nationwide petition for presentation at the opening of the Fall session of Parliament.

The original basis for the discrepancy between a male pensioner and a widow was established by Parliamentary Committees back in 1919. At that time Parliament said pay the pensioner the same as cleaning staff in the Public Service. The cleaners were all male; so were the ex-servicemen. When it came to setting pension for a widow, the Government allowed the discrimination to continue. The so-called "char ladies" in the Public Service were paid 75% of the salary of a male cleaner. No Government would attempt to establish pay rates on such an unequal basis today.

The War Amps has been waiting its chance to see the legislation changed since the decision of the Ontario Appellate Court. Now there is evidence to indicate that the Government has abandoned its discriminatory policy between men and women. For example, in 1997 surviving widows of Hong Kong veterans received the same as if the husband was alive (ie. $24,000). The "parity" principle applied, as well, to the current special payment for Merchant Seamen. The amounts ranged from $5,000 to $20,000 and were paid in full to the widow if the Merchant Mariner had died.

Surely the words of O Canada are intended to reflect male and female equality. There are probably less than 6,000 widows alive who would benefit. In their declining years the authorities must recognize that, in their role as spouses, these gallant women helped to look after their men disabled by war. Now that the war widows are on their own, their pension should be equated with the amount that would have been paid to their menfolk, had the wives died first.

Cliff Chadderton
CEO - The War Amps
Ottawa, Ontario