Question 20
Do you think there should be beneficial evidential provisions for veterans’ claims? Why?
Beneficial evidential provisions are part of what McGechan J referred to as the “benevolent” nature of the war pensions regime. The provisions also recognise that issues such as attributability to service may engage evidentiary requirements relating to service in a foreign land and a point in time long ago. The claimant may find it impossible to access such evidence from within his or her resources. This may pose an insurmountable obstacle to establishing the requisite connection between service and disablement. The gathering of such material is much more readily achievable by the Crown than it is to the Service member.
Question 21
Do you think that the presumption of attributability in section 17(3) of the War Pensions Act 1954 should apply only to veterans with war and emergency service?
No. As noted above, NZDF considers that the “war and emergency service” definition is no longer appropriate in the current operational environment. The NZDF recognises that there could be certain impairments associated with non-operational service that can be presumed to be attributable to service.
Question 21 Personnel Feedback
Focus Groups – Numerous participants cited the example of infantry personnel who suffer ankle, knee, hip, etc injuries which indicate that non-operational activities may be attributable to service as well.
Question 22
Would you like to see the current evidentiary provisions retained in new legislation?
Yes
Question 23
Do you support the evidentiary provisions being simplified, but not reduced in effect?
Yes.
Question 24
Would you like to see a provision providing for the Crown to disprove claims? Should any limits be placed on this?
It is an unfortunate fact that in respect of any system of determining entitlement there will be claims which are unmeritorious, erroneous or fraudulent. Fairness to the taxpayer demands that the Crown must be able to disprove claims that are not soundly based.
Question 25
Would you like to see the introduction of a system of Statements of Principles to simplify the process of establishing a connection between service and injury or disease?
Statements of principles now appear in a number of Acts and are generally regarded as an effective way of legislating for circumstances in which there may be so many variations of personal circumstances that the use of “black letter” laws may not be as effective.
Question 26
Would you like to see an expansion of the presumptive list system?
Yes – ongoing monitoring of Service members’ health can contribute to the development of the presumptive list.
Question 27
How should the presumptive list be determined?
The presumptive list should be created and maintained by an expert panel. There should also be communication with allies to ensure new conditions are quickly recognised.
Question 27 Personnel Feedback
Focus Group – Multiple Service members explained that they had served operationally as a single New Zealander attached to another military contingent. Consequently, due to the size of the NZDF and nature of engagement, there often aren’t sufficient cohort numbers to monitor conditions occurring where NZDF personnel are attached to the UN or other Services.
Previous | Contents | Next