Contact Details
Website
Hill Office
House of Commons *
Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada
K1A 0A6
Telephone: 613-996-5152
Fax: 613-947-4601
* Mail may be sent postage-free to any member of Parliament.
Constituency Office
Main office - Airdrie
16-620 1st avenue NW
Airdrie, Alberta
T4B 2R3
Fax: 403-948-0879
Contact Details
Website
Hill Office
House of Commons *
Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada
K1A 0A6
Telephone: 613-992-4573
Fax: 613-996-6885
* Mail may be sent postage-free to any member of Parliament.
Constituency Office
Main office - Moose Jaw
1-54 Stadacona street West
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan
S6H 1Z1
Fax: 306-691-3579
Contact Details
Website
Hill Office
House of Commons *
Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada
K1A 0A6
Telephone: 613-996-1783
Fax: 613-995-1415
* Mail may be sent postage-free to any member of Parliament.
Constituency Office
Main office - Barrhead
5124 50 street Box 4458
Barrhead, Alberta
T7N 1A3
Fax: 780-305-0343
Contact Details
Website
Hill Office
House of Commons *
Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada
K1A 0A6
Telephone: 613-992-4394
Fax: 613-992-8676
* Mail may be sent postage-free to any member of Parliament.
Constituency Office
Main office - Yorkton
43 Betts avenue
Yorkton, Saskatchewan
S3N 1M1
Fax: 306-786-7207
Contact Details
Website
Hill Office
House of Commons *
Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada
K1A 0A6
Telephone: 613-990-7769
Fax: 613-996-0194
* Mail may be sent postage-free to any member of Parliament.
Constituency Office
Main office - St. Thomas
215-750 Talbot Street
St. Thomas, Ontario
N5P 1E2
Ahead of budget bill vote, veterans plead with Ottawa to change course
Budget bill includes language that could cost veterans millions in compensation for federal error
Retired
colonel Michel Drapeau says Canada is breaking its 'sacred oath' to
veterans if it passes the Budget Implementation Act unamended. (Patrick Leduc/CBC)Veterans and their advocates are urging the Carney Liberals to change course and amend a bill before the House of Commons to remove sections that they say unfairly target people who served Canada.
Buried inside the more than 600-page Budget Implementation Act are sections that would, advocates say, retroactively amend a law that governs how veterans' benefits are calculated.
Advocates say if it is passed, the result would be that the federal government would legitimize mistakes it made in overcharging veterans and undervaluing their benefits, and at least three lawsuits, worth an estimated tens of millions of dollars, would be thrown out.
Canada's Veterans Ombud wrote to the veterans affairs minister in December, saying passing the bill as-written would "effectively legitimize its past overcharges to veterans and nullify ongoing litigation aimed at securing reimbursement for affected veterans."
"I believe that using retroactive legislation to correct administrative errors is both inappropriate and unfair and undermines confidence in government decision-making, sets a troubling precedent, and denies justice to those who served our country," wrote retired colonel Nishika Jardine.
Jardine was writing specifically about a proposed class-action lawsuit over an alleged decades-long overcharging for veterans in long-term care since at least 1998.
The charging error was first reported by CBC News, prompting the litigation.
Veterans may be paying too much for long-term care, analysis showsThe statement of claim argues veterans were "significantly overcharged" because the federal government calculated the benefit based on the cost of the most advantageous province, excluding territories from their calculation.
But the Interpretation Act, which governs the regulations, says territories ought to be included. The long-term care rate in the Northwest Territories has been less expensive for years, meaning veterans in long-term care could be overcharged by more than $3,000 annually.
Lawyers and advocates say Prime Minister Mark Carney's government is trying to paper over its costly mistake by retroactively changing the law.
In a move described as a "thermonuclear weapon," the Carney government's Budget Implementation Act seeks to retroactively define the term "province" as excluding territories.
One of the lawyers representing veterans says the proposed changes to legislation equates to Canada breaking its promise to veterans.
"If there's anything that is sacred, it's the obligation governments of all colours have made since the First World War, that our obligation to veterans is to look after them, certainly not reverse our obligation to them," said retired colonel Michel Drapeau, one of the lawyers representing veterans.
Conservative Veterans Affairs critic Blake Richards said the move is "reprehensible."
"The government made a mistake, and their way of trying to fix it is to retroactively change legislation and try to rob veterans," he said.
In a statement, a spokesperson for Veterans Affairs Minister Jill McKnight said the bill "clarifies" how benefits have always been paid in the past.
"The BIA does not propose any reductions in benefits, nor does it require anyone to repay benefits already received," Adam Rogers-Green said.
Veterans urge Ottawa to change course in payment fightColdbrook, N.S., resident James Fera, a retired lieutenant-colonel who volunteers with veterans in long-term care weekly, said he's frustrated with the lack of transparency from the federal government over these proposed changes.
Fera served in the Canadian Armed Forces for 25 years and was deployed to Afghanistan and Haiti.
"The reality is, it's unfair, it's shameful," he said. "If Mr. Carney believes that this is something that is worthwhile to do, then he should come out and say himself, and say why he’s done it."
The bill is still in front of Parliament, although through a programming motion, MPs agreed to submit their amendments before Feb. 19. Clause-by-clause debate is expected to happen on Feb. 23.
Richards wouldn't say if the Conservatives plan to amend the bill to remove the sections affecting veterans.
The Federal Court has already adjourned a class action pending the outcome of the proposed legislation.
An ongoing dispute about alleged errors in pro-rating certain indexation adjustments is adjourned pending the outcome of parliamentary debate. Drapeau said he believes three lawsuits could be thrown out if this law is passed.
In addition to the proposed class action targeting the long-term care dispute, there's a third lawsuit claiming that Veterans Affairs miscalculated annual adjustment rates on disability benefits payable to veterans under the Pensions Act.
The bill could pass through the House of Commons as quickly as Wednesday, Feb. 25.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
With files from Salma Ibrahim
Government seeks to retroactively change law, potentially avoiding paying veterans over federal error
‘I’ve never seen anything like this,’ says lawyer representing veterans
The Carney government’s budget legislation contains an amendment that lawyers representing veterans say is a bid to cover up a decades-long error that led to overcharging for long-term care.
“Instead of owning up to their error, they are trying to change the rules after the fact,” said Malcolm Ruby, partner at Gowling WLG and co-counsel in a proposed class-action lawsuit seeking damages for an estimated tens of thousands of veterans.
“Retroactively changing legislation is like a thermonuclear weapon that the government has in litigation, that no other litigant has.”
The proposed amendment is buried in the 637-page budget implementation act, tabled on Tuesday.
It seeks to “clarify” the formula used for how much veterans should pay for long-term care, and apply that formula retroactively — a move being interpreted by the lawyers in the proposed class action as a way to legalize an expensive federal error.
In October 2024, CBC News reported that the federal government likely made an error interpreting its own law, causing the Veterans Affairs Department to miscalculate what veterans should pay.
Sources with ties to the department had said the issue was known internally and never addressed.
With some exceptions, veterans in the department's long-term care program are required to cover only the cost of their accommodation and meals. That cost is supposed to be set at a level equal to the lowest cost of room and board in the least expensive province, with federal law defining “province” to include territories.
However, an analysis by CBC News showed that Veterans Affairs was excluding territories from its calculation — even though the Northwest Territories has long had the cheapest rate for long-term care.
The analysis showed that last year alone, veterans may have been overcharged by about $3,130.
The revelations prompted Ruby and his co-counsel, retired colonel Michel Drapeau, to launch the class action. They allege the overcharging has been happening since at least 1998.
“They should have been applying a formula that was based on territorial expense. Instead, they neglected that,” said Ruby. “That resulted in overcharges and they were fairly significant overcharges for individual veterans.”
A day after the CBC News report, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told the House of Commons that officials were investigating the matter further.
‘They’re trying to shut down veterans’
But the Carney government’s proposed amendment to the Veterans Health Care Regulations seeks to retroactively define “province” as excluding the territories — which could have the effect of eliminating the obligation to reimburse veterans who overpaid.
It would also effectively end the class action ahead of its certification hearing in 2026.
“They’re trying to shut down veterans and their lawyers who are making them accountable for their errors,” said Ruby.
Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne dismissed a question on why the government seeks to amend the law.
“What I can say is that when it comes to services, actually we added money to support veterans, recognizing the service they’ve done to our nation,” he said on Wednesday.
A spokesperson for Champagne said the amendments “clarify” existing methodology used to calculate benefits, and that the government is entitled to make such changes.
“While there is a general presumption that legislation only applies to future events, this presumption can be displaced if there is clear legislative intent for the law to apply to past events,” said the spokesperson, John Fragos, in a statement.
But Drapeau, who served in the Canadian Armed Forces for more than 30 years, disagrees with the idea that it’s acceptable to retroactively change a legal definition that affects how benefits are calculated.
“I’ve never seen anything like this,” said Drapeau. “This is not law. This is fiction.”
The bill will have to pass through Parliament in order to take effect.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Veterans may have paid too much for long-term care for years due to federal error
CBC's analysis has triggered an internal investigation and a class action lawsuit application
A misinterpretation of federal rules may have caused tens of thousands of Canadian veterans to be overcharged for long-term care since at least 2005.
Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) says it's investigating — and some lawyers have filed a new class-action lawsuit application — after an analysis by CBC News uncovered a possible error in how the department calculates what veterans pay for long-term care.
"It's just kind of a slap in the face [to] these veterans, who've given all they had during the Second World War, the Korean War … then to not be looked after properly, and not to be looked after the way Parliament wanted them to be," said retired colonel Michel Drapeau, who now practises law in Ottawa.
Lawyer
Michel Drapeau is part of a legal team that is looking to file a class
action application arguing that veterans have been overcharged for
long-term care. (Kate McKenna/CBC News)With some exceptions, veterans in the department's long-term care program are required to cover only the cost of their accommodation and meals. That cost is supposed to be set at a level equal to the lowest cost of room and board in the least expensive province.
Figures provided by Veterans Affairs Canada show that for this year, veterans in the program pay a maximum of $1,236.90 monthly for long-term care — roughly equivalent to the lowest available cost in Manitoba.
But the federal law that governs how other laws are interpreted defines "province" as "province or territory" — and long-term care fees are significantly cheaper in the Northwest Territories.
The long-term care rate in the Northwest Territories for this year is $976 — meaning veterans could be getting overcharged by more than $260 per month, or $3,130 annually.
Figures obtained by CBC News from provinces, territories and VAC show that some veterans in the long-term care program have been paying more than the lowest cost in the lowest province or territory (which consistently has been the Northwest Territories) for at least 19 years.
Drapeau said that publicly available information indicates only a small number of veterans are in long-term care right now — about 1,500. Ten years ago, he said, there were far more of them in care — between 6,000 and 14,000.
"We're not talking about millionaires here," he said, adding that many veterans are on pensions. "I think the average Canadian would say, 'Wow, that's $3,000 a year. It is significant.'"
Drapeau's firm and four other firms represented 330,000 CAF and RCMP veterans in a recent class action over pension and disability payments. Those firms successfully argued Veterans Affairs Canada made a similar error in law in calculating monthly disability benefits.
In that case, Manuge v. Canada, the court concluded that the federal government undervalued a pension adjustment based on the income tax rate for the province with the lowest combined federal/provincial rate, and failed to consider that Nunavut had the lowest rate.
The settlement ordered the federal government to repay the class action members the $528.5 million they'd lost to the error, plus millions of dollars in interest dating back to 2003.
Two sources with ties to Veterans Affairs Canada told CBC News that the question of veterans being overcharged for long-term care had been flagged internally.
Both sources said the department has known about this discrepancy "for years." One source said the question of whether the issue would become public was a matter of "when, not if."
CBC News asked the department why territories aren't included in the calculation of the cost for long-term care for veterans, and when VAC was first told of this issue. The department responded with a media statement.
"At Veterans Affairs Canada, we are working to ensure that all veterans have equitable access to our programs and services. We have been asked to investigate this matter," said the statement.
Minister
of Veterans Affairs Ginette Petitpas Taylor speaks in the foyer of the
House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Wednesday, Jan. 31,
2024. (The Canadian Press)The office of Veterans Affairs Minister Ginette Petitpas Taylor declined an interview request but issued a statement.
"I have been briefed by my department officials regarding the meals and accommodations matter, and I have tasked the department to investigate it further," she said in the statement.
"We have been there for veterans, and we remain committed to supporting them. As there is pending litigation, it would be inappropriate to comment on the subject beyond this."
A spokesperson for the Veterans Legal Assistance Foundation, a charity established to provide Canada's veterans with funding to obtain legal counsel, said she hopes this matter gets settled and veterans and their estates get justice.
"Veterans Affairs Canada has one job, which is to support these veterans and their families, and they fail miserably, time and again," said Sandra Goodwin.
"Veterans and their families shouldn't have to use lawyers, they shouldn't have to access the judicial system to get the benefits they've earned."
Class action application filed
After being asked about this issue by CBC News, some lawyers involved in the Manuge class action said they were going to file another class-action application alleging that VAC is overcharging veterans for long-term care.
Drapeau said he believes the government made the same mistake by not taking territorial rates into account.
"As far as I can see, this time we're dealing with something similar again, a rate not being applied properly," he said. "Fundamentally, it's the same issue and the same principle."
A statement of claim was filed in federal court on Monday on behalf of the estate of Gordon Allan. The claim says the Second World War veteran died in 2022 after being admitted to a long-term care facility in 2019, and that he paid the maximum accommodation and meal charges for his care.
He participated in the Normandy invasion in June 1944 and was discharged from the military in 1946, says the statement of claim.
The claim was filed by Drapeau's firm and Gowling WLG.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Lawsuit over massive Veterans Affairs accounting error to cost Ottawa almost $1 billion
More than 272,000 veterans were short-changed on pension and disability payments for almost eight years
An embarrassing multi-million-dollar accounting error that was covered up for years at Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) will end up costing taxpayers almost $1 billion, now that a Federal Court judge has signed off on a combined class-action settlement.
More than 272,000 former soldiers, sailors and aircrew — most of them elderly — were short-changed on pension and disability payments for almost eight years, starting in 2002.
VAC staff made the mistake by not factoring provincial tax credits for individuals into their calculations. The department discovered the error in 2010.
The oversight was fixed but officials decided at the time not to notify the affected veterans and not to offer reimbursement for the missed payments.
The affected veterans — who include some former members of the RCMP — sued and have now been awarded an additional $817 million on top of $165 million in compensation earmarked by the federal government.
The Liberal government chose to settle the case rather than fight it out in court. A settlement agreement struck last fall was approved by Federal Court Justice Catherine Kane on Jan. 17, 2024.
The settlement comes into effect in mid-March.
Former veterans ombudsman Guy Parent originally uncovered the accounting error in 2018.
A CBC News investigation the following year showed how VAC covered up and downplayed the error to the former Conservative government, which was at the time engaged in a massive deficit-cutting exercise. According to internal records, no one was held accountable for the decision to keep silent and shortchange veterans.
The Liberal government's compensation program began making payments in 2019 and early 2020, but to date only 48 per cent of the funds have been dispersed, according to VAC.
When the compensation program was announced six years ago, a substantial number of the affected veterans — 170,000, most of them from the Second World War and the Korean conflict — had passed away. Some of their survivors and other veterans joined the class action lawsuit, which eventually grew to encompass 330,000 military and RCMP veterans.
'It's about integrity,' veteran says
Dennis Manuge, who fought and won a separate landmark legal battle with the federal government over military disability, was one of the plaintiffs in the case.
The idea that VAC could hide the mistake without consequences was one of his biggest motivations for getting involved, he said.
"Nobody has been held accountable and that's extremely frustrating," he said.
"I think, just on a fundamental level, it's about the dishonest nature of how everything kind of unfolded … It's about doing the right thing. It's about integrity, honesty. And when somebody that operates in the highest offices and makes decisions with big budgets and big money, we want those people [to be] responsible and accountable."
He said the federal government has shown no interest in finding out who was responsible, even with a massive settlement hanging over it.
Veterans Affairs Minister Ginette Petitpas Taylor declined CBC's request for an interview.
CBC News reached to the current veterans ombud, retired colonel Nishika Jardine, who was not available to comment.
Manuge said there is some disagreement among the class-action plaintiffs and their lawyers about the settlement agreement. Lawyers for the veterans uncovered additional errors in the government's calculations, he said — mistakes that could affect future payments going forward.
"If you're taking somebody to Federal Court and you want a remedy, one would think you would want that remedy to be a permanent remedy," he said.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Anatomy of a blunder: How Veterans Affairs quietly buried a $165M accounting error
The department found and corrected the error in 2010 - but made no efforts to compensate veterans
It was an incredibly simple (and incredibly daft) mistake — and it led to a $165 million federal fiscal faux-pas.
In 2001, the Liberal government of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien made what appeared to be an innocuous change to federal tax forms.
It separated federal and provincial tax exemptions, shuffling the basic personal tax credit from one part of the document to another.
Staff at Veterans Affairs, who administer disability awards and pensions, did not pick up on the modification to the tax law for several years and ended up short-changing former soldiers — most of them elderly — who received disability pensions and awards benefits.
It was a mistake that cascaded, over time, into a whopping, multi-million dollar fiscal mess that Justin Trudeau's Liberal government began to mop up last fall.
CBC News has obtained hundreds of pages of documents under access to information legislation, and has conducted a series of background interviews with current and former federal officials, to understand the extraordinary blunder that shortchanged up to 272,000 disabled veterans of roughly $165 million.
The documents show how officials traced the confusion back to the change in the forms and in the Income Tax Act.
More troubling is the fact that the error was discovered and quietly fixed by Veterans Affairs in 2010 — but no effort was made to notify or reimburse those affected by it.
For critics, the records obtained by CBC News raise important questions about fiscal accountability at Veterans Affairs. What actions did bureaucrats take when the error was first discovered? Why it was kept hidden until the former veterans ombudsman blew the whistle internally in 2017?
A significant number of the affected veterans — 170,000 — have since passed away. While the Liberal government has pledged to repay their estates, the documents reveal that Veterans Affairs does not keep track of next-of-kin and has no means of finding them.
No one was held accountable for covering up the mistake and the Liberal government has shown no interest in conducting a follow-up investigation to get to the bottom of the matter.
Jean-Pierre
Blackburn shakes hands with veteran Bruce Bullock, 87, in Ottawa on
Saturday, May 8, 2010. Blackburn was Veterans Affairs minister when the
department corrected an accounting error that cost veterans roughly $165
million - without attempting to compensate those affected. (Pawel Dwulit/The Canadian Press)A spokesman for Veterans Affairs Minister Seamus O'Regan ducked questions about who made the decision to cover up the error, and why.
"While I cannot speak about the decision-making processes of the previous government, it would be hard to believe a decision regarding the financial benefits of Canada's Veterans would have been made without the Minister's awareness," said Alex Wellstead, a spokesman O'Regan.
"What I do know is that when this was brought to our government's attention, we fixed it."
The minister at the time was Conservative Jean-Pierre Blackburn.
He was unavailable when contacted CBC News.
A 'fundamental breakdown'
Another former Conservative veterans minister, Erin O'Toole, said he believes there should be an investigation and described the decision to bury the mistake as an ethical lapse.
"This appears to be a fundamental breakdown of proper practices in a major department of the government," he said.
"I believe we would support the government on some sort of investigation into this to see if there's a cultural issue here. If someone elevated it to the political level on our watch and we didn't fix it, that is a mistake."
The briefings, slide deck presentations, letters, evaluations and actuarial projections offer a sketch of how the embarrassment unfolded and proceeded unchecked at the department level for the better part of eight years.
Starting in 2002, Veterans Affairs did not take into account the impact of the basic provincial tax credit on veterans.
The flawed method used to calculate disability pensions and awards "was never really questioned until about 2011," says an undated federal government analysis.
The department insisted recently in a statement to CBC News that it "consistently applied the formulas correctly" and blamed the tax changes themselves for the error.
According to the documents obtained by CBC News, Veterans officials at the time appeared to be operating on the assumption that they had the law on their side because the legislation was "silent" on the precise method of conducting the calculations.
The "Pension Act does not specify the calculation for the annual adjustment," said a December 2018 slide deck presentation.
Downplaying the error
The law may not be precise, but the documents show — under the heading of "new information" — that the regulations supporting the legislation do spell out the proper method for calculating the adjustment.
Internally, it seems, officials were trying to gloss over the mistake by downplaying its significance and making it appear — in one of the more recent briefings — as a proactive, positive measure:
"In 2011, [Veterans Affairs Canada] implemented a prospective change to the calculation of Disability Pensions and Disability Awards which was to the benefit of the veteran."
A number of troubling questions need to be put to current and former Veterans Affairs officials now, said O'Toole.
"Did the age — and in some cases, the relatively small amounts — lead someone to make the wrong decision from an ethical standpoint? That is what we should investigate," he said.
"That is perhaps one of the most troubling connections we might draw from this. I sincerely hope that was not the determination made by someone."
In the documents, Veterans Affairs defended its financial practices and said it "employs a rigorous process whereby all escalation calculations are completed by the Statistics Directorate and validated by the Attestation Unit. [The] review and sign off is completed by various directors up to and including the director general of finance."
It's not clear whether anyone in those positions was held accountable when the error was discovered.
A history of program gaffes
Retired lieutenant-general Walter Semianiw, a former senior official at Veterans Affairs, said he's not surprised that the blunder happened in the first place. He also questioned the meticulous fiscal image the department has tried to present in the documents.
During his three years there, Semianiw said, department officials were called on the carpet regularly by the federal Treasury Board for being unable to accurately cost programs.
"Every time we developed a new policy based upon direction from government, gave it to corporate services to figure out the dollars, had it ready in a Treasury Board submission ... to be fair, not all of them, but enough of them came back from Treasury Board, saying, 'Your numbers are wrong,'" he said.
"When I was there, this seemed to be a challenge for the department's corporate services area to be able to determine the correct financial make-up for any type of new program."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Court adjourns veterans’ benefits class action pending outcome of proposed retroactive legislation
By Karunjit Singh ·
Law360 Canada (December 23, 2025, 3:09 PM EST) -- The Federal Court has adjourned a certification motion in a proposed class action challenging the practice of prorating certain indexation adjustments for veterans’ benefits pending the outcome of proposed legislation that could end the class action.In St-Jean v. Canada, 2025 FC 2000, released on Dec. 18, Justice Russel Zinn concluded it was in the interests of justice to grant the requested adjournment rather than press on with the certification motion.
“I have reached this conclusion primarily on the basis that justice is better served in proceeding when it is known whether the provisions of Bill C-15 have received assent,” the judge wrote.
The plaintiff, André St-Jean, sought to represent a class of individuals who were affected by the practice of prorating certain indexation adjustments for certain financial benefits, including the earnings loss benefit (ELB), the retirement income security benefit (RISB) and the income replacement benefit (IRB), available to disabled veterans.
The lawsuit alleges that between April 2006 and April 2019, Canada adopted the practice of prorating the indexation of inputs on which benefits were calculated.
The plaintiff alleges the practice resulted in the putative class of more than 40,000 disabled veterans being paid less than the fully indexed benefits to which they were otherwise entitled based on annual adjustments reflecting increases in the consumer price index.
In April 2019, the Veterans Well-being Act and Veterans Well-being Regulations came into force and expressly forbade the practice.
On Nov. 18, 2025, the federal government tabled Bill C-15, which proposes to amend, with retroactive effect, provisions of the Regulations to specify that the first annual indexation adjustments to certain amounts used in the calculation of the ELB are to be prorated.
Canada sought an adjournment of the certification motion on the basis that the bill, if enacted, could have a determinative effect on the certification criteria, particularly on whether the claim discloses a reasonable cause of action.
Canada also submitted that the length of the requested adjournment would be relatively short, as the outcome of Bill C-15 is expected to become clear by April 2026.
The plaintiff opposed adjournment, arguing that it would be uniquely harmful to the putative class comprised of veterans of the Canadian Armed Forces who became mentally and/or physically disabled while serving Canada.
The plaintiff also submitted that Canada’s conduct in advancing Bill C-15 is aimed at thwarting the proposed class from exercising their existing rights and providing ex post facto legislative authority for the practice of prorating the benefits.
He further submitted that he intended to mount a challenge to the constitutionality of the proposed retroactive legislation if it becomes law.
Justice Zinn held that justice would be better served in proceeding when it is known whether the provisions of Bill C-15 have received assent.
“If it does receive assent, then the certification request appears to be dependent on the validity of the amendments and that will require a unique finding of the Court based on materials not presently before it,” the judge wrote.
He further noted that if the proposed amendments do not receive assent or are amended such that they have no impact on the action, the certification motion would have suffered only a slight delay, with little to no prejudice to either party.
The court granted Canada’s motion to adjourn the certification motion.
Counsel for the plaintiff, Malcolm Ruby of Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP, said the government was seeking to retroactively give itself authority for conduct that lacked statutory authorization.
“I believe it’s the intention of the federal government to end the class action through the legislation,” Ruby told Law360 Canada.
Ruby added that the government is also attempting to shut down two other lawsuits through retroactive legislation: Estate of Gordon Allen and Stanley Broski v. His Majesty the King and Raymond White et al. v. His Majesty the King.
White et al. is a certified class action alleging that Veterans Affairs Canada miscalculated annual pension indexation by using the wrong comparators, contrary to statutory requirements, while the Estate of Gordon Allen and Stanley Broski concerns allegations that veterans who received long-term care benefits under the Veterans Health Care Regulations were overcharged for the cost of that care.
Ruby said retroactive legislation is rare, describing it as a “thermonuclear weapon” in litigation.
He added that if Bill C-15 is enacted, the plaintiff intends to argue that putative class members are being discriminated against on the basis of disability.
Adam Bazak of Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP, Angela Bespflug of Murphy Battista LLP and Donnaree Nygard of Nygard Legal also acted as counsel for the plaintiff.
Counsel for Canada were Laura Tausky, Asad Moten, Margaret Cormack and Adam Kouri of the Department of Justice Canada.
If you have any information, story ideas or news tips for Law360 Canada on business-related law and litigation, including class actions, please contact Karunjit Singh at karunjit.singh@lexisnexis.ca or 905-415-5859.
Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP is an international, sector-focused law
firm with offices throughout Canada and more than 1,400 legal
professionals around the world. The firm has been involved in more than
100 class actions several of which have dealt with pensions and
benefits. Recently, the firm was involved in the settlement of a $800
million class action on behalf of Canadian Armed Forces veterans and
RCMP retirees.
Counsel on this class proceeding:
Malcolm N. Ruby
Phone: +1.416.862.4314
Email: malcolm.ruby@gowlingwlg.com
Office: Toronto, ON
Adam Bazak
Phone: +1.416.369.7363
Email: adam.bazak@gowlingwlg.com
Office: Toronto, ON
Koskie Minsky LLP, based in Toronto, is one of Canada’s foremost
class action, pension, labour, employment and litigation firms. Its
class actions group has been a leader in class actions since 1992 and
has prosecuted many of the leading cases in the area. Many of Koskie
Minsky’s class actions have been landmark cases that were the first of
their kind in Canada — successful not only in changing existing laws,
but also in providing a voice and substantial financial recovery for its
clients. The firm’s class action litigators act in all levels of Court,
including frequent appearances at the Court of Appeal and the Supreme
Court of Canada.
Counsel on this class proceeding:
Kirk M. Baert*
Phone: +1.416.595.2072
Email: kbaert@kmlaw.ca
Office: Toronto, ON
*Kirk Baert Professional Corporation
Adam Tanel
Phone: +1.416.595.2072
Email: atanel@kmlaw.ca
Office: Toronto, Ontario
McInnes Cooper is among the 25 largest business law firms in
Canada. The firm serves clients across North America and abroad from six
offices in Halifax, St. John’s, Fredericton, Moncton, Saint John, and
Charlottetown. With nearly 200 lawyers and over 200 professional
resources, McInnes Cooper is positioned to offer clients a range of
legal services. The firm provides services to industry-leading clients
in every major sector and with experience in all jurisdictions.
Counsel on this class proceeding:
Daniel Wallace*
Phone: +1.902.444.8630
Email: daniel.wallace@mcinnescooper.com
Office: Halifax, NS
*D.F. Wallace P.C. Incorporated
Michel Drapeau Law Office (MDLO) provides legal advice and
services focused on federal administrative law with an emphasis on
Military Law, Veterans Law, Freedom of Information (access) Law and
Privacy Law, Human Rights Law, and Employment Law in the public sector
as well as civil litigation. MDLO’s clientele is drawn principally from
the Canadian military across Canada (Regular and Reserves including RMC
cadets), veterans, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and federal public
servants.
Counsel on this class proceeding:
Michel W. Drapeau
Phone: +1.613.236.2657, ext.200
Email: Michel.Drapeau@mdlo.ca
Office: Ottawa, ON
Joshua M. Juneau
Phone: +1.613.236.2657, ext.201
Email: Joshua.Juneau@mdlo.ca
Office: Ottawa, ON
A team of lawyers at Murphy Battista LLP, lead by Bill Dick,
K.C., and Angela Bespflug are working on this proposed class action
lawsuit. Bill is a partner at the firm and an experienced trial lawyer
who has obtained multi-million dollar awards on behalf of clients
injured in complex personal injury and medical malpractice claims. Bill
is a Past President of the Trial Lawyers Association of BC. Angela has
extensive experience as class counsel in large-scale, national class
actions. She has achieved settlements for class members in excess of
$800 million and has been recognized by the Federal Court of Canada as a
leading practitioner in the field. Angela was named one of the Top 25
Most Influential Lawyers of 2020 by Canadian Lawyer.
Counsel on this class proceeding:
Bill Dick, K.C.*
Phone: +1.250.549.1999
Email: bill@murphybattista.com
Office: Kelowna, BC
*William Dick Personal Law Corporation
Angela Bespflug*
Phone: +1.604.683.9621
Email: bespflug@murphybattista.com
Office: Vancouver, BC
*Angela Bespflug Law Corporation
Re: Unfair Veterans-related Measures in Bill C-15, Budget 2025 Implementation Act
December 12, 2025
The Honourable Jill McKnight, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence
66 Slater Street, 16th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0P4
Re: Unfair Veterans-related Measures in Bill C-15, Budget 2025 Implementation Act
Dear Minister McKnight,
After careful review, and after hearing many concerns from the Veteran community, I must point out the unfairness I believe will result from certain retroactive measures contained within the Budget 2025 Implementation Act (Bill C-15).
Contrary to what was originally intended in the Interpretation Act, sections 373-375 of Bill C-15 would retroactively redefine “province” to exclude the territories in the Veterans Health Care Regulations as it relates to Accommodations and Meals payment by some Veterans in long term care. In so doing, Veterans Affairs Canada would effectively legitimize its past overcharges to Veterans and nullify ongoing litigation aimed at securing reimbursement for affected Veterans.
It is inconceivable that the Department of Justice and Veterans Affairs Canada personnel who drafted the Veterans Health Care Regulations would have been unaware of the Interpretation Act that has for many decades prior to 1993 expressly defined “province” to include the territories. Indeed, the Department of Justice had published internal guidance that references the Interpretation Act in their 1995 “Guide to the Making of Federal Acts and Regulations”. Therefore, one must assume that the drafters understood that the word “province” in the Veterans Health Care Regulations was meant to include the territories and thus conclude that the Department made a mistake in not doing so when undertaking the Accommodations and Meals calculations.
I believe that using retroactive legislation to correct administrative errors is both inappropriate and unfair and undermines confidence in government decision-making, sets a troubling precedent, and denies justice to those who served our country. Normally, retroactive provisions are limited to changes in legislation or regulations only back to the date of a formal government announcement of such intended change; for example, a change in tax rules announced in a budget and made retroactive in a budget implementation act to the date of the budget announcement. In this case, however, retroactivity of almost 30 years is extraordinary; the amendments proposed in Bill C-15 should be prospective only.
Ultimately, it is clear to the Veteran community that Bill C-15 sections 373-375 are meant solely to correct an error made by the Department and to deny them compensation for the overcharge. VAC already faces growing reputational backlash over the manner in which it communicates with Canada’s Veterans, their families and Survivors. I fear this retroactivity measure, if enacted, will only increase the deep distrust in Veterans Affairs Canada that, sadly, I hear about far too often.
On behalf of our most elderly and disabled Veterans who would be unfairly and disproportionately affected by these retroactive amendments, I would ask that they be removed from Bill C-15. Beyond that, I believe acknowledging the error and making whole those Veterans who were affected would be a step in the right direction towards regaining the trust of this community.
Sincerely,
Colonel (Ret’d) Nishika Jardine, CD
Veterans Ombud
- Date modified:
Contact Us
We are here to assist when you feel you have been treated unfairly by Veterans Affairs Canada. We know you may be frustrated. But we cannot accept discriminatory, abusive or inappropriate language when we are communicating. Your respectful interaction with us helps us to help you.
Submit a Complaint
If you want to submit a complaint, please use our complaint form. It's the best and safest way to send us your information. We do not accept complaints by email.
You can also call us: Telephone (toll-free): 1-877-330-4343 or TTY: 1-833-902-9399
OR reach us by mail: Office of the Veterans Ombud, P.O. Box 66 Charlottetown, PE C1A 7K2
What to expect when you contact our office
Find out more: what to expect when you contact the Veterans Ombud
General Questions
If you have a general question about our office or what we do, you can email us at info@ombudsman-veterans.gc.ca.
Please don’t send complaints or personal information to this email.
Media Inquiries
Lucille Hodgins
1-613-943-7884
lucille.hodgins@ombudsman-veterans.gc.ca
Media Relations Advisor, OVO Communications
Office hours
Monday to Friday, except holidays
- 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (Atlantic)
No comments:
Post a Comment