Reference is made to the pages that were on the Veterans Affairs Canada Web site in May 1999 and a letter from Veterans Affairs dated February 12th, 1999.

Legend

• Merchant Navy: The Facts, issued by Veterans Affairs Canada (VACDOC)
• Merchant Navy: Questions and Answers issued by Veterans Affairs (VACFAQ)
• Letter from Veterans Affairs, February 12, 1999 (VACLET)

On April 29th, Cliff Chadderton, CEO of The War Amps and Chair of the National Council of Veteran Associations, filed a document with the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs challenging some of the statements of VAC. A summary follows, under the headings used by VAC.

How much does a Merchant Navy Veteran receive from Veterans Affairs Canada?

VAC states the maximum disability pension benefit for a married Merchant Navy Veteran is $25,974.72. The Veterans Affairs letter (VACLET) stated that there are only three Merchant Seamen receiving the maximum rate. We suggested that out of the 305 Merchant Navy in receipt of pension, a more accurate figure would have been to give the average amount of pension received by these personnel.

What Bill C-61 (passed by the House of Commons on March 25th, 1999) means for Merchant Navy veterans?

Under SURVIVORS' PENSIONS the VAC Web Page indicates Merchant Navy have the same coverage as Armed Forces (AF) veterans. The VAC documents fail to explain that the coverage for Merchant Navy survivors came into effect only in 1992 on the same basis as that enjoyed by Canadian AF veterans since World War II.

It fails also to indicate that if a pensioned member of the AF died anytime after his date of discharge, a pension would have been awarded to his widow. (Note: Full pension if assessed at 50% or more from 1945; half pension if assessed below 50% since 1971.) Merchant Seamen widows could receive pension on the same basis only after amendment of the Legislation in 1992.

War Amps Says

The VAC document indicates SURVIVORS' ALLOWANCES are available to Merchant Seamen and AF veterans on the same basis. The document (VACLET) admits that surviving spouses of Merchant Navy veterans were entitled to the same eligibility for survivors allowances only if the Merchant Seamen qualified for the allowance after 1962.

How many Merchant Navy veterans are receiving benefits from VAC?

The VAC documents state "about 75 per cent of all Merchant Navy veterans are receiving benefits", and adds: "This is considerably higher than for members of the AF." The VACLET letter admits that a higher proportion of Merchant Navy veterans saw service in a theatre of war than was the case for Forces as a whole. The letter goes on to state: "... statistics on the wartime Merchant Navy veteran population are not as complete as one would like, and this has made it impossible to provide precision in responses to questions of this type." The VACLET document: "Such records as there were (for Manning Pools in particular) have been for the most part destroyed."

War Amps Says

We question how VAC can make self-serving statements about the number of Merchant Navy veterans receiving benefits. There are approximately 2,000 Merchant Navy World War II veterans alive. VAC states only 305 are in receipt of pension and 246 are in receipt of income support allowances. Additional Merchant Seamen could be receiving minimal allowances to "top up" other income - but these are not identified.

Why didn't Merchant Navy veterans receive the same benefits as Armed Forces veterans after the War?

The VAC document states: "... following the war, it was believed that merchant mariners would continue to pursue their civilian careers in the merchant marine." A more accurate view is found in the VACLET letter:

"The wording in the Fact sheet (produced by VAC) could well have been expanded to include the point made by the then Minister of Transport, i.e., that Merchant Navy veterans were encouraged to stay in that occupation."

War Amps Says

The VACLET document is referring to a statement issued in 1945 by the then Minister of Transport, the Honourable Lionel Chevrier, indicating that rehabilitation benefits "should not be of a nature which would encourage seamen to leave the industry at the end of the war to seek employment in other fields as the services of any skilled seamen will be required if Canada is to maintain a Merchant Marine after the war." This is a far cry from the reason given in the VAC document to the effect that rehabilitation benefits were denied because it was believed that Merchant Seamen would pursue career in a post-war Mercantile Marine.

VAC FAQ issued 06-05-99 states that many AF veterans received NO resettlement benefits. This statement is totally false. Every AF veteran received the following:

• Clothing allowance ($100);
• Cash grant equal to 30 days pay;
• Transportation to place of enlistment;
• Gratuities ($7.50 each month in Canada and $15.00 for each month overseas plus supplementary gratuity equal to six months service overseas);
• Re-establishment credit equal to the basic gratuity;
• Income tax exemption.

In addition, each AF veteran had access to:

• Reinstatement in civil employment;
• Job preference with National Employment Service;
• Unemployment benefits;
• Vocational or educational training;
• Land settlement if did not receive Vocational or Educational training.

In an attempt to throw cold water on the claims by Merchant Seamen, by suggesting that many AF veterans did not receive resettlement benefits, departmental officials have ignored an old adage: "Comparisons are odious." Departmental Annual Reports indicate expenditures on behalf of AF veterans who served in World War II were substantial (while Merchant Seamen were denied these benefits.)

• Downgrading Benefits for Armed Forces veterans, as an argument against a lump sum in lieu of benefits denied to Merchant Seamen 
• Benefits available to Armed Forces veterans but denied to Merchant Seamen - or available on restricted basis only 
• Other Countries 
• Employment 
• Retroactivation 
• Lump Sum Payment 
• Questions and Answers 
• Merchant Seaman Factoids 
• Merchant Navy Errors or Misleading Statements by VAC 

A VAC argument against a lump sum in lieu of benefits denied to Merchant Seamen.

The VAC document states:

Following the Second World War, only 5 per cent of AF veterans received benefits under the Veterans' Land Act and only 13 per cent received post-secondary educational benefits.

The Department states approximately 1 million persons served in the AF. 

War Amps Says

According to the VAC statement, 5% received VLA benefit. That would be 50,000. The DVA Annual Report 1961-62 states "From inception of operations to March 31, 1962, a total of 89,533 veterans had been established under the Act. This is 9%. VAC's figures are out by 39,533. Not very persuasive if they are attempting to indicate that only a small number of AF veterans made use of VLA, compared with Merchant Navy personnel to whom this benefit was available only if disability pensioners.

The VAC states: 

"Only 13% (of AF veterans) received post-secondary education benefits." 

War Amps Says

This would be 130,000. Quite a substantial number. This benefit was denied entirely to Merchant Seamen.

Apparently the slant VAC is attempting to develop with these figures is that not all AF veterans took advantage of the benefits available. This is a serious insult to the Parliamentarians and Veterans Organizations which developed what has been called by all Ministers of Veterans Affairs, including the present Minister, the most effective veterans legislative program in the world.

We quote the statement in the Veterans Charter, published under the authority of the Right Honourable Ian A. MacKenzie, Minister of Veterans Affairs (revised 1949 edition) as follows:

. . . the generation which fought so well in World War II has been given a satisfactory start in its reentry to civil life.

. . . a generation of university trained men and women will be in the cultural and economic fabric of the Dominion.

. . . to the skilled trades and commercial occupations will be added many additional thousands who will be competent to undertake the basic tasks of shop and office.

. . . to the number of potential homeowners and homemakers, it has contributed 35 thousand men and women by use of Veterans' Land Act and Reestablishment Credits.

. . . the Veterans Charter is a long-range plan to utilize the best minds and talents of a generation.

War Amps Says

This raises the question of why VAC, in attempting to justify the failure to provide adequate rehabilitation benefits for Merchant Seamen, downgrades and diminishes the effect of the Veterans Charter legislation for World War II AF members.

The Document VACFAQ issued 06-05-99 states:

"Canadian Merchant Navy veterans were eligible to receive 19 of the 26 wartime benefits available to AF veterans after the Second World War."

The War Amps Says

This statement is misleading, in the extreme. Below are set out, in two sections, most of the benefits available to AF veterans, indicating those for which Merchant Navy had eligibility. Even where such eligibility existed, there were significant restrictions. We list 22 benefits hereunder.

Benefits available to Armed Forces veterans for which Merchant Seamen were NOT eligible:

1. Clothing allowance: $100.
2. Cash grant at discharge: equal to 30 days pay and allowances.
3. Transportation: to place of enlistment or other place at no greater cost.
4. Gratuities: $7.50 for each 30 day period in western hemisphere; $15 for each 30 day period overseas; supplementary gratuity: 7 days pay and allowance for each six months service overseas.
5. Reestablishment credit: Grant equal to the basic gratuity.
6. Educational training: University fees and living allowance.
7. Housing rental: preference in houses built under Wartime Housing Regulations.
8. Loans for business purposes: for those wishing to engage in business or professions.
9. Veterans insurance: low cost policies.
10. Income Tax: Pay and Allowances exempt while in the AF and for six months after discharge, including all gratuities, grants, pensions and allowances. Merchant Seamen, rather than an exemption, paid income tax.
11. Last Post Fund: To meet burial expenses.

Benefits Available to Armed Forces Veterans For Which Merchant Seamen Were Eligible, But only in Part, or on a Restricted Basis.

1. Reinstatement in Civil Employment:
   Employer required to reinstate but application to be made within three months of discharge on or before April 30, 1946. Merchant Seamen eligible, but only if discharged by April 30, 1946. (Most remained in Merchant Navy until 1950.)
2. Preference in jobs registered with National Employment Service:
   Not practical for Merchant Seamen as such were not discharged until five years after war; many employers did not consider them as veterans.
3. Vocational training:
   Available for AF veterans in vocational schools and "on the job" with employers without restriction. Merchant Seamen became eligible only on December 29, 1948, with application having to be made by September 30, 1950. Many Merchant Seamen were still at their wartime trade in the Merchant Service during this 22 month period. 
4. Disability Pensions:
   Available for AF veterans for disability resulting from injury or disease attributable to or incurred during service, in Canada or overseas, without restrictions. Merchant Seamen eligible only if disability occurred in direct action or counteraction with the enemy; must apply within 12 months. 
5. Widows Pension:
   Available to widows and dependent parents of AF veterans if death occurred during or attributable to service regardless of place or circumstances of death (insurance principle). Available to widows of Merchant Seamen, only if death was caused by action or counteraction with the enemy. Legislation was amended only in 1992 to provide equality with AF veterans. Even then, the "insurance principle" does not apply - thus, death has to be connected with service in the Merchant Navy, while AF veterans could die from a civilian accident. 
6. War Veterans Allowance:
   Means-tested allowance available to AF veterans 60 years of age, or younger if incapable of self-maintenance. This benefit became available to Merchant Seamen only in 1962, with the proviso that the recipient required at least one trip through dangerous waters and six months service. 
7. Medical Care and Treatment:
   Available to AF veterans for one year after demobilization and/or if pension entitlement granted. Merchant Seamen eligible only if in receipt of disability pension under restrictions (enemy action) described herein. 
8. Prosthetic appliances:
   Available for AF veterans if required in connection with pensioned disability. Available to Merchant Seamen only if pension paid under restrictive circumstances (enemy action) described herein. 
9. Land settlement:
   Financial assistance for AF veterans for full time farming, commercial fishing or small holding. Merchant Seamen eligible only if in receipt of disability pension under restriction (enemy action) described herein. 
10. Children's education:
    Financial assistance available for children of AF veterans in receipt of War Disability Pension. This benefit available to Merchant Seamen, but only if pension awarded under restrictive circumstances (enemy action) explained herein. 
11. Pensioners Training Regulations:
    AF veterans in receipt of pension eligible for assistance for retraining. Merchant Seamen eligible only if pensioner under restrictive provisions (enemy action) explained herein.

War Amps Says

The bald statement in VAC web page (VACFAQ) that Merchant Navy veterans were eligible to receive 19 of 26 wartime benefits is open to serious challenge. As indicated above, of the 22 benefits identified as being available for AF veterans, Merchant Seamen were eligible for only nine, but under much less generous circumstances than their AF counterparts.

The VAC documents state that Merchant Seamen were eligible for Bonuses which were the equivalent of War Service Gratuities and Credits for AF veterans.

War Amps Says

It fails to indicate that the Bonuses were available only to Merchant Seamen who signed up under the Government-operated Manning Pools.

Those who chose to sail under a direct relationship with the shipping company (probably about 35%) were excluded.

The VAC document states that Merchant Navy were eligible for unemployment insurance. The VACLET letter of February 12, 1999, corrected this admitting that VAC should have said: "NO" instead of "YES."

The VAC document states that vocational training was available for Merchant Navy. It fails to state, however, that the Merchant Seamen Vocational Training Order (PC 6227) of December 13, 1949, restricted benefits to persons under 30 years of age; applied only to those Merchant Seamen who received the War Service Bonus and provided that application had to be made before September 30, 1950 - - a period of only nine months allowed for application. 

On the other hand, grants for education assistance for AF personnel had been in force by Order-in-Council dating back to December 19, 1940. There were neither age limits, nor time limits for AF veterans.

The VAC document proclaimed that Merchant Seamen were eligible under the Reinstatement in Civil Employment Act. For all practical purposes, this was of no benefit, in that most Merchant Seamen were not discharged until five years after the war, making it difficult for a pre-war employer to offer reinstatement. 

The VAC document states that Merchant Seamen were eligible for Veterans Land Act, but only if in receipt of a Disability Pension. Firstly, Disability Pension for Merchant Mariners was limited to accident or injury suffered in direct action or counter-action with the enemy. This was extremely limited compared with the "insurance principle" which meant that AF veterans were entitled to pension for death, injury or illness suffered, even in a non-military setting in Canada.

War Amps Says

Using February 1999 figures, there are only 305 Merchant Seamen in receipt of War Disability Pension, even under the expanded provisions of the 1992 amendments. This is out of a total of approximately 2,000 Merchant Seamen still alive.

The document VAC FAQ states "Other nations have NOT treated their Merchant Navy veterans very differently from Canada." False! In Great Britain, Merchant Navy veterans were treated exactly the same as AF veterans. Australian Merchant Seamen received similar benefits from 1939. In 1988, the U.S. government passed legislation granting full veteran status and benefits to Merchant Seamen.

War Amps Says

It is true to say that, in Canada, the benefits with the passage of the Omnibus Bill in 1999 were on a par with other nations. Consideration must be taken of the fact, however, that it took Canada 54 years to give Merchant Seamen equalization with war veterans.

It seems irresponsible, therefore, for VAC to state that: "Other nations have not treated their Merchant Navy veterans very differently from Canada." This certainly would not apply to our major allied partners such as Great Britain and the United States as stated above. In Australia, Merchant Seamen were treated the same as their British counterparts until 1994 when Australian Merchant Seamen received equality with members of the Australian AF.

The VAC FAQ states that in the year following World War II "approximately 100,000 AF personnel found themselves unemployed." Not relevant! 

The Federal government offered jobs to Merchant Seamen in a planned post-war Mercantile Marine, which failed, partly because of activities in which the Government sided against the Merchant Seamen's own Canadian Seamen's Union. The enquiry headed by Judge T.J. Norris filed its Report on June 16, 1963. It held the Canadian Government responsible for supporting the Seafarers International Union of the United States which opposed the Canadian Union. Also the Norris Report declared that the Canadian Union was not Communist dominated. This was in response to a public perception that it was.

War Amps Says

Certainly, the Government encouraged Merchant Seamen to remain in the Merchant Navy. When a plan for a Canadian Mercantile Marine failed, the question arises as to why the Government did not, then, give Merchant Navy personnel access to veterans benefits, in that they faced the requirement of re-establishment in civil life.

References are made in many of the VAC documents to the word "retroactivation", suggesting that Merchant Seamen are requesting that the Pension and Allowance Benefits, which came about in the 1992 legislation, should allow an applicant to receive pension or allowance back-dated to the qualifying event. This is simply not true! Veterans organizations did not ask for this type of retroactivation!

War Amps Says

The government documents misconstrue the word "retroactivation." The Merchant Seamen have been seeking a lump sum as compensation to make up for the benefits which were denied to them in the government's overall re-establishment program (known as the Veterans Charter). The VAC documents indicate that no other government provided retroactivation in its legislation. We agree. Hopefully it will be understood, therefore, that Canadian Merchant Seamen were not seeking retro-activation either. Their request was based on the significant (though undetermined) loss to them because they did not have available re-establishment provisions such as housing, assistance for farming or commercial fishing, vocational or educational training, job preference or other benefits which would have allowed them to re-habilitate themselves as civilians after loyal and valiant service to their country as Merchant Navy.

The VAC document states: "The cost of retroactivity would be prohibitive." Veterans organizations agree. The total, however, for a reasonable payment for the remaining 1,200 Merchant Seamen would be well within the capability of the Government. In fact, in 1992, the Government stated that the cost of the improved legislation would be $100 million over five years. Some $40,000,000 remains unspent! 

The VAC document states: "A large lump sum payment to all Merchant Navy veterans would give some Merchant Mariners a greater benefit than was provided to many AF veterans", suggesting, this would be "unfair." Obviously, it is not possible to make an accurate calculation of the loss to the Merchant Seamen, represented by the denial of benefits as identified herein! 

War Amps Says

It is perhaps sufficient, in challenging the Government's statement, to recognize that Merchant Seamen who could NOT qualify for income support from 1945 until 1962, lost millions of dollars. Those with disabilities (or their widows) could not qualify for the same pension benefits as members of the AF until 1992. During this 27 years, again, the Government would have saved millions of dollars. This saving continues even today, in that if a Merchant Seamen who was a potential beneficiary under the income support legislation (War Veterans Allowance) or under Disability Pension, died before 1968 or 1992 respectively, such widows are still today without a pension. 

WAR AMPS COMMENT: 

We have provided information in this paper that the benefits which were available to Merchant Seamen contained severe restrictions which did not apply to AF veterans. The VAC doc appears to support the argument of Merchant Seamen when it states that they had to wait until 1992 - some forty-seven years - for any type of benefit similar to those available to AF veterans in 1945.

WAR AMPS COMMENT: 

We challenge the VAC answer that many AF veterans did not receive resettlement benefits. As indicated earlier in our document, some eleven benefits were paid to AF veterans automatically. Also, such veterans had the opportunity to apply where Merchant Seamen were denied access to these benefits.

WAR AMPS COMMENT: 

Merchant Seamen were not eligible for income support (means tested) allowances until 1962 and became eligible for full pension benefits only in 1992. Moreover they received literally no rehabilitation assistance when their jobs evaporated with the failure of Canada's Post War Merchant Mercantile Marine.

WAR AMPS COMMENT: 

According to the public statement of the Honourable Lionel Chevrier, Minister of Transport, rehabilitation benefits were denied Merchant Seamen to encourage them to remain available for a planned post-war Canadian Merchant Navy. This failed in 1950. There is ample documentary evidence to support the claim that the government purposely held back rehabilitation benefits so that Merchant Mariners would be available to man the Canadian ships in the post-war years.

• Full pension coverage came into effect for Merchant Navy survivors only in 1992. According to VAC, even as late as April of 1999, only three Merchant Seamen were receiving 100% disability.
   
• During the War, and until 1971, injured Merchant Seamen had to apply for Pension within one year of the accident, unless extenuating circumstances existed. Even then, and until 1992, the accident (or death) had to have incurred in direct action or counteraction with the enemy. Imagine a tramp steamer going after a German battleship!
   
• VAC states (erroneously) that many Armed Forces veterans did not receive resettlement benefits. Yet, six benefits (clothing allowance, etc.) were paid automatically.
   
• The Government refused rehabilitation benefits to Merchant Navy as they were needed to man the Canadian Mercantile Marine after the war. Their jobs evaporated by 1950, as Canada could not compete with foreign shipping companies. Yet, the Government still refused rehabilitation benefits.
   
• VAC states: "Only 5% of regular Armed Forces personnel received Land Settlement Benefits." Yet, the DVA annual report for 1961-62 states 89,533 (or 9%) veterans had been established under the Veterans Land Act. The VAC figures are out by about 40,000.
   
• VAC states that Merchant Navy veterans were eligible to receive 19 of 26 wartime benefits available for Armed Forces veterans. This is misleading. We have identified 22 benefits of which 11 were available to Armed Forces veterans only, while another 11 were available to Merchant Seamen, but usually on a more restricted basis.
   
• Vocational training became available for Merchant Seamen only on December 13th, 1949. The claimant had to be under 30 years of age. The benefit expired on September 30th, 1950 - a period of only nine months, and was available only to Merchant Seamen who signed up through the Government MANNING POOLS.
   
• Merchant Seamen lost millions of dollars as they could not qualify for Income Support until 1962 and for full Disability Pension until 1992.
   
• VAC states 75% of the 2,000 Merchant Navy veterans now receive benefits. Figures released by the Department, however, indicate only 305 are in receipt of pension, and 246 receive Income Support Allowances. The balance of 949 are probably receiving minimal allowances under the Veterans Independence Program.

• Maximum pension $25,900 - - but, only THREE get it;
   
• Widows of Merchant Navy receive same coverage as those of Armed Forces veterans - - but, Merchant Navy widows became eligible only in 1992;
   
• About 75% of Merchant Seamen receive benefits which is "considerably higher" than for members of Armed Forces - - but, Merchant Seamen fought bitter battles in the North Atlantic while many Armed Forces veterans were forced to serve in Canada only;
   
• According to VAC, Merchant Mariners did not receive rehabilitation benefits as it was believed they would continue to pursue civilian careers in the Mercantile Marine - - but, VAC failed to explain that such benefits were, in fact, denied because the Government wanted them to stay in the Merchant Navy rather then return to civilian life;
   
• VAC said many Armed Forces veterans received NO resettlement benefits - - but, six of these benefits were paid automatically, without application;
   
• VAC stated only 5% of Armed Forces veterans received Land Settlement benefits - - but, the Department's own Annual Report for 1961-62 gave the figure as 9%;
   
• VAC stated in an obvious attempt to down play importance that only 13% of Armed Forces veterans received post-secondary education benefits - - but, this was a substantial number with a price tag as of 1949 of $141,400,268;
   
• VAC stated that Merchant Navy were eligible to receive 19 of 26 wartime benefits available to Armed Forces veterans - - but, our research indicates there were 11 benefits for which Merchant Seamen had no eligibility at all, and another 11 benefits were available to Merchant Seamen only on a restricted basis and in many cases not until 47 years after the war;
   
• VAC documents stated that Merchant Seamen were eligible for Bonuses which were the equivalent of War Service Gratuities and Credits for Armed Forces veterans - - but, these Bonuses were not available to the approximately 35% of Merchant Seamen who sailed under Articles with private ship owners rather than go through the Government Manning Pools;
   
• The VAC documents state that Vocational Training was available for Merchant Seamen - - but failed to clarify that the authorizing Order-in-Council restricted benefits to those under 30 years of age; applied only to those who received a War Service Bonus (65%); and the application had to be made within a nine-month "window" between December 1949 and September 1950;
   
• The VAC documents proclaim that Merchant Seamen were eligible under the Reinstatement in Civil Employment Act - - but, application had to be made within one year and to all intents and purposes, the Act became inoperative by 1948, while most Merchant Seamen were not discharged until 1950;
   
• The VAC documents stated that other nations had treated their merchant veterans in the same manner as Canada - - failing to note that Merchant Seamen in Great Britain received the same benefits as veterans; in the United States, the benefits became available in 1988 and in Australia, some benefits were available right after the war with upgrading in 1994;
   
• The VAC documents stated that a large lump sum payment to Merchant Seamen would give them a greater benefit than for veterans of the Armed Forces - - ignoring the obvious fact, that Canada's reestablishment program for veterans was the best in the world and, all Armed Forces veterans, regardless of their service, had access from the date of discharge to post-secondary education, vocational training, housing, loans for business, etc.;
   
• In a Question and Answer document, VAC stated that Merchant Seamen qualified for "an equitable number" of veterans benefits - - failing to note, that even during the war, pension for death or disability would be paid only if application were made within one year; and, in the long run, Merchant Navy benefits were equalized with veterans only in 1992, and, even then, failed to provide the "insurance principle," which means that an Armed Forces veteran could receive pension for disability in a non-military setting in Canada, whereas, Merchant Seamen had to be injured while on duty.