- Reaction score
- 6,149
- Points
- 1,160
ARMY_101 said:I can't find "combat" anywhere in the definition of "veteran." Does that mean sailors and pilots aren't veterans because they aren't in combat?
Did you even read the article??
ARMY_101 said:I can't find "combat" anywhere in the definition of "veteran." Does that mean sailors and pilots aren't veterans because they aren't in combat?
recceguy said:Did you even read the article??
Or even the title?recceguy said:Did you even read the article??ARMY_101 said:I can't find "combat" anywhere in the definition of "veteran." Does that mean sailors and pilots aren't veterans because they aren't in combat?George Wallace said:This is a good read. Perhaps the Minister should read it.
From the Huffington Post; Do You Know What Defines a Veteran? It's Not Just Combat, by Jeff Rose-Martland
How many doctors/nurses have been health minister? I'm OK with someone who can understand the issues and have a spine to do what's right when required (knowing it's always within the limits of party discipline and policy), than a vet who may not be all that swift.PrairieThunder said:IMHO: A person who has never served as a military member should not hold the position of Minister of Veterans Affairs. Ever.
milnews.ca said:I can't find "combat" anywhere in the definition of "veteran." Does that mean sailors and pilots aren't veterans because they aren't in combat?
Did you even read the article??
Or even the title?
How many doctors/nurses have been health minister? I'm OK with someone who can understand the issues and have a spine to do what's right when required (knowing it's always within the limits of party discipline and policy), than a vet who may not be all that swift.
milnews.ca said:How many doctors/nurses have been health minister? I'm OK with someone who can understand the issues and have a spine to do what's right when required (knowing it's always within the limits of party discipline and policy), than a vet who may not be all that swift.
ARMY_101 said:I can't find "combat" anywhere in the definition of "veteran." Does that mean sailors and pilots aren't veterans because they aren't in combat?
ARMY_101 said:I can't find "combat" anywhere in the definition of "veteran." Does that mean sailors and pilots aren't veterans because they aren't in combat?
PrairieThunder said:A person who has never served as a military member should not hold the position of Minister of Veterans Affairs. Ever.
ARMY_101 said:I can't find "combat" anywhere in the definition of "veteran." Does that mean sailors and pilots aren't veterans because they aren't in combat?
ARMY_101 said:Ministers aren't meant to be subject-matter experts like the bureaucracy, they're meant to be policy and political experts who can navigate the politics required to effect changes in their department. VAC/DND ministers don't need to be veterans, Health Minister doesn't need to be a doctor, Fisheries and Oceans and Environment Ministers don't need to be biologists, etc. It's not their role (nor should it be, if they're elected as representatives of the Commons).
MilPoints inbound :nod:Scott said:Stop posting.
The Honourable Julian Fantino, Minister of Veterans Affairs, will march with Veterans, men and women in uniform and cadets in the BC Lions Salute to Veterans and Military Valour half-time show.
Location:
BC Place
777 Pacific Boulevard
Vancouver, British Columbia
Date:
Friday, November 1, 2013
Time:
7:00 p.m. ....
Future Pensioner said:"Newly-minted Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino hasn't exactly been winning friends recently. Nor his influence on veterans been inspirational, except in the way that an emetic inspires. It appears the Honourable Minister is in over his head with his portfolio... or perhaps gagging on it... as mere months after his appointment -- and before he has even taken his seat -- veterans are demanding his resignation. Fantino has been handling the issues at Veterans Affairs with all the grace of a newborn moose on ice skates."
more of the article: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/jeff-rosemartland/canada-veterans-affairs_b_4103494.html
The sole purpose of a Parliamentary Committee is to represent the interests of stakeholders? I suppose that depends on the committee, and what it's allowed to do - highlights mine from what the Parliamentary web page says about committees:Teager said:.... The place to discuss whether laws meet the needs of Veterans is before a Parliamentary committee whose sole purpose is to hear and represent their interests ....
.... Committee work provides detailed information to parliamentarians on issues of concern to the electorate and often provokes important public debate. In addition, because committees interact directly with the public, they provide an immediate and visible conduit between elected representatives and Canadians.
Committees are extensions of the House, created by either standing or special orders, and are limited in their powers by the authority delegated to them ....