Will the next Veterans Ombudsman even be a veteran?

One is left wondering when one reads this Notice of Vacancy posted at Veterans Affairs Canada. (Emphasis mine)

The successful candidate must have a degree from a recognized university in a relevant discipline or a combination of equivalent education, job-related training and experience. A law degree would be an asset.

Interesting. Colonel Stogran has a degree in electrical engineering.

The selected candidate must have demonstrated experience in developing and fostering productive partnerships, as well as experience dealing with government, preferably with senior officials.

That all depends on what "dealing with government" means and what constitutes a "senior official". Are we talking about the bureaucracy or are we talking about the hillbillies in the Prime Minister's Office? Is a senior official a senior civil servant (a boffin) or a PMO message management merchant (bollard head)?

The favoured candidate must have knowledge of the principles of administrative law and natural justice ...

I'm betting the Command and Staff College level of legal training for senior officers is suddenly not going to be sufficient.

The selected candidate must have good knowledge of the operations of government.

Really? In relation to what? Does this mean some intimate knowledge beyond what a responsible and informed citizen would possess? Or, does this mean willing to take orders from the political animals in the PMO?

The chosen candidate must possess strong leadership and managerial skills and a proven aptitude for appropriate and effective liaison and interaction with stakeholders. The successful candidate must have superior interpersonal skills and will be an individual of integrity, discretion and strong professional ethics. The ability to apply analytical, interpretative and evaluative thinking to situations and the ability to anticipate the short and long-term consequences of his/her strategies are required. In addition, the preferred candidate will have superior communications skills, both written and oral, and the ability to act as spokesperson in dealing with the media, public institutions, governments and other organizations. The selected candidate will not only be objective, impartial and fair, but also flexible and resilient.

Colonel Stogran was all of those things, and more. I am betting, however, that "flexible and resilient" doesn't mean getting knocked down by the kids in the PMO and come back fighting.

It's starting to look like the PCO wants a senior civil servant lawyer with connections to the current government. Either Pat Stogran's appointment as the first Veterans Ombudsman was PMO orchestrated window dressing or they simply couldn't handle the type of fight offered by a real combat veteran. Maybe it was a bit of both.

In any case, nowhere in that Notice of Vacancy does it state that the candidate, successful, preferred, chosen or otherwise will possess experience with the Canadian Forces and have a strong understanding of the culture of Canada's service personnel.

The more things change, the more they remain the same

Back in the day there was no such thing as a military ombudsman. We had to state a complaint, "at the table", as a Captain's Requestman. (The procedure for the Royal Navy and Canadian Navy are identical).

When the military ombudsman became a fact of life there were two things we all hoped:

1. That the pressure of complaints and the means to provide redress would be somewhat relieved; and,

2. That some of the ongoing irritants which so regularly and consistently pissed-off sailors, soldiers and air-force personnel would be addressed.

It would appear, however, that such is not the case. In fact, given that we now have fairly regular casualties occurring in Afghanistan, "things" may have gotten worse.

The outgoing military ombudsman is criticizing Ottawa for failing to provide adequate support to families of fallen and injured soldiers, especially those with post-traumatic stress disorder.

In an exclusive interview with CBC News, Yves Côté said his office has dealt with many families who complain of too few answers after a death in Afghanistan or little help after loved ones return home with mental health problems.

Here's the point: PTSD is still treated as something embarrassing by the Canadian Forces and there is still a stigma attached to those who visit the "shrink".

The ombudsman was supposed to have provided a fast-track in the resolution of problems. From all accounts, that has occurred, but there are great gaping holes, one of them being the difficulties encountered by families and the ability of families to speak directly to the CF bureaucracy in the absence of the military member.

The article continues with something even more revealing than most people think. Do you know how difficult it is to get a special forces member to speak about anything?

A former member of Canada's elite special operations force told CBC News that while he was serving in Afghanistan, his wife haggled with the military in a dispute over $30,000 in moving expenses.

Brian, who did not want to give his last name, said he returned from his mission and witnessed the toll it took on his wife.

"She had lost a bunch of weight; her skin was grey. She looked sick," he said. "I was making my wife sick because of my job and their lack of support."

He quit the military last July, citing family stress.

"It was the greatest job I've ever had," he said. "It was fantastic, but I love my wife more, and I'm not going to let them treat her like that."

Cote gave it a good shot, but he was fighting a system that provides a lot of lip service to problems involving families. The bureaucracy would rather not hear from families or spouses at all, much less acknowledge their existence.

Côté said Ottawa should make sure families are not ignored or lost in the system, as they are "paying a huge price as a result of their dear ones having served Canada in Afghanistan."

He said he is presenting recommendations on how to address such issues in two reports his office is preparing, to be released this spring.

No one from the department of national defence was available for comment.

Taken in order, Cote is absolutely correct, the two reports will find themselves a place on the famous "shelf of dust" and, I'm not surprized.

Supporting the troops has nothing to do with being a cheer leader for a dubious mission.

H/T CC.