Introduction
Four principles guide the decisions of the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) in response to the discussion questions posed in the Law Commission’s Towards a New Veterans’ Entitlements Scheme: A Discussion Paper on a Review of the War Pensions Act 1954:
- Recognition of Service
- Attributability to Service
- Coverage to the ACC Standard
- Needs-based Approach
Recognition of Service
New Zealand society clearly values military service. The high value that society places on this service is demonstrated by the fact that it is willing to limit Service members’ exercise of certain basic human rights common to all other citizens of liberal democracies in order to maintain a military capability.
Considering this limitation affects all Service members, this document has purposely avoided using the term ‘veteran’ to emphasise that all service deserves recognition through entitlements rather than just service which qualifies a Service member as a ‘veteran’, especially since the term is yet to be defined in the context of the modern military environment.
The feedback of over 240 focus group participants overwhelmingly expressed a desire for more ‘recognition of service’ for Service members and their families. The recognition they suggested varied from simple public acknowledgement to extended financial compensation. Regardless, their sentiments supported the Law Commission’s explanation that, “A career in the Armed Forces differs from all other occupations. Armed Forces personnel are required to subject themselves to the risk of death or injury. They, in turn, are obligated by law to obey orders and, as such, they have a duty to fight and kill if necessary. The sacrifices that members of the Armed Forces are called to make requires the State to treat them fairly and to provide for them…” Recognition of service acknowledges several circumstances that are unique to the military career:
- Harm’s Way – tasks that Service members are required to complete are inherently dangerous. They are knowingly put in harm’s way in the service of the State. The modern context of military engagement includes physical, psychological, and environmental harm.
- Uncontrolled Risk – Even in controlled environments there is an element of uncontrolled risk due the duties being performed that are distinctly different than the average civilian job.
- Compulsion – Service members take an oath of allegiance to the Sovereign and in doing so are at the will and direction of the government. While civilians have the freedom to make choices in career and life, Service members volunteer to forgo some important elements of this freedom in support and defence of New Zealand. Both domestically and overseas, the State compels Service members to fulfil duties and responsibilities exceptionally different from what is expected of the general public. In meeting these expectations, Service members risk exposure to physical and psychological harm that they do not have the legal right to avoid or refuse.
- Conscription – The service of some former Service members has been initiated by conscription or compulsory military service rather than of their own free will. This may conceivably happen again in the future.
- Family Demands – The nature of military service also places unique demands on the family of a Service member, including frequent moves, long separation, operational focus, and deployment requirements, on top of the everyday situations of work, money and quality time.
Attributability to service
The Crown only has a duty of care for conditions that are attributable to the Service member’s service. Conditions which are solely age related or not attributable to service should be treated on the same basis as all other New Zealanders. The standard of proof of attributability may differ between conditions developed on qualifying operations and conditions developed during routine military service, however there must be a linkage between the condition and service.
Coverage to the ACC Standard
The NZDF agrees with the Law Commission view that ‘The most salient issue with the war pension system’s lack of adaptation to the modern context…is how little war pensions have been affected by the advent of accident compensation in 1974. In many ways accident compensation beneficiaries receive a much better deal than war pensioners.” The NZDF agrees with this, and seeks to align coverage under the new Act with current ACC entitlements to ensure that all Service members are covered to the ACC standard for all qualifying disabilities (to include injury, illness, and death) that are attributable or aggravated by service, thereby simplifying and equalizing access to all government entitlements within a comprehensive, efficient system.
Needs-based Approach
Entitlements, in particular allowances and rehabilitation assistance, should be provided through a needs-based approach. Rather than provide blanket compensation meant to address the needs of all claimants, entitlements should be targeted to the individual requirements and circumstances of the claimant and/or their family. This approach will uphold the NZDF’s duty to care for the individual, as well as demonstrate fiscal responsibility.
Decision making process
Due to the nature of this review process, the options and approaches proposed by the NZDF in this document have not been financially evaluated. Rather, the NZDF bases its responses on principles that are fair to the individual Service member, fair to the NZDF as an organisation, and as fiscally responsible as possible within the information readily available. We welcome the opportunity to work with the Law Commission to cost the options with Treasury and are willing to revaluate our responses in light of new information.
Personnel Feedback
The opinions of focus group and online survey participants are those of the individual and not the view of the NZDF as a whole.
Previous | Contents | Next