Legion chief slams Ottawa’s claim it’s not bound by longstanding promises to wounded veterans

Countries throughout time are accused of short-changing their military veterans but Canadian vets have nurtured a particularly deep anger toward the Conservative government over a series slights.

The Royal Canadian Legion hammered the government Monday for its decision to try and quash a class-action lawsuit by injured veterans of Canada's Afghanistan mission over its revised benefits program.

Legion Dominion president Gordon Moore said it's "reprehensible" that Ottawa is claiming it is not bound by promises to wounded vets made by previous governments dating back to the First World War, The Canadian Press reported.

He suggested it might become harder to recruit soldiers in the future when Canada needs them.

CP reported last week the government announced it plans to appeal a B.C. Supreme Court ruling that cleared the way for the class-action suit against changes to the compensation system for wounded vets that replaces the regular lifetime disability pension with a lump-sum payment.

The suit alleges the new system is discriminatory and violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by treating them differently from veterans of previous conflicts, CP said.

"The motivation here is money, saving money on the backs and blood of veterans that served Canada," lawyer Don Sorochan said.

Federal lawyers plan to argue that allowing the suit to go ahead would undermine the authority of Parliament.

The basis of the veterans' case is a promise made by then-Prime Minister Robert Borden in 1917 that Canada owes a special duty to wounded veterans, an obligation successive governments have recognized.

But federal lawyers argue the promises of past governments are not and should not be binding on present and future governments, CP said.

[ Related: Veterans campaign to keep district offices open ]

"While this may sound reasonable, their (the veterans') argument could have a far broader impact than perhaps intended by the plaintiffs," said a government statement released last Wednesday by Veterans Affairs, CP reported.

"If accepted, this principle could undermine democratic accountability as parliamentarians of the future could be prevented from changing important legislation, including the sort of changes that some veterans would like to see to the new veterans charter."

Moore said the government's determination to treat its moral obligations to veterans the same as other government policies could affect Canada's ability to fight in future conflicts.

His inference seems to be, why would anyone join the armed forces if Ottawa can cut wounded veterans adrift to save a few dollars?

The government is already under fire from older veterans upset it's closing a number of Veterans Affairs district offices, forcing elderly vets to travel sometimes hours to obtain services or try and get help online or via Ottawa's catch-all Service Canada offices.

The government said the office rationalization was geared to focusing service in areas where veterans are concentrated.

"Our government is dedicated to ensuring veterans and their families have the support they need, when they need it," Janice Summerby, spokeswoman for Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino said in statement Thursday, according to CTV News.

"Service standards will not change and we remain dedicated to providing veterans with the same high-quality service to which they are accustomed regardless of their geographic location."

[ Related: Tories order veterans charter review ahead of critical watchdog report ]

The government's benefit reforms have already been slammed by veterans ombudsman Guy Parent, who warned in a report released last week that the most seriously injured vets face poverty without more financial support.

Parent said seriously ill and wounded vets are barely scraping by, the Toronto Star reported.

"I think anyone would be surprised to find that veterans who had sacrificed life and limb for this country find themselves in that situation," deputy ombudsman Gary Walbourne said.

Fantino responded by saying the ombudsman's report would be an "important starting point" for the government's review of its veterans charter, which was ordered before Parent's long-awaited report was tabled.