Introduction
As explained in ‘Compensation and Permanent Impairment’ the ability to guarantee a Service member adequate financial support in the event of impairment is critical to building a confident and capable force. In the case of service-related impairment a Service member – and even more so their family – needs to know they will be taken care of. Again, the NZDF recommends that income support be provided to the ACC standard,with the possibility of additional support as recognition of qualifying operational service.
Question 42
Do you think the residency requirements for a Veteran’s Pension for persons living in the Pacific Islands should be relaxed? Why?
Rehabilitation, treatment and income support provisions should align with ACC legislation. Recognition or compensation for disablements developed on Qualifying Operational Service could be retained.
It is noted that there maybe issues tracking retired Service members overseas.
Question 43
How many people living in the Pacific Islands are adversely affected by the residency requirements for a Veteran’s Pension?
NZDF is unable to provide additional information.
Question 44
To qualify for veterans’ income support under 65 years, should there be a requirement that the impairment resulting in a veteran being unable to work be attributable to or aggravated by his or her service?
Yes – The Crown’s primary responsibility to a Service member is to ensure that any impairment is effectively managed in order to restore the quality of life of the Service member. Where impairment is not attributable to service, the Crown’s obligation is no greater than to any other citizens.
Question 45
What do you think the income support entitlement for a veteran under 65 years should be?
Service personnel should receive income support on a standard similar to ACC. However, additional components should be considered as recognition of impairments arising from service on qualifying operation service.
For service-related impairments medical assistance and rehabilitation access should be needs-based and not dependant on age.
Question 45 Personnel Feedback
Focus Groups In the event they were unable to work due to impairment from qualifying service, the majority of participants felt that the government and/or NZDF should compensate their income to 100% by topping up the 80% provided through ACC. They argued that in exchange for their duty to the State, the State had a duty to maintain their quality of life, as well as that of their families through income support. In the event that impairment caused by qualifying service did not qualify for ACC (i.e. disease or illness), participants argued that compensation to the same level of ACC with the NZDF top-up should still be provided.
Question 46
Do you think income support for veterans over 65 years should be the same as the New Zealand Superannuation entitlement? If not, why not? In what way should it differ?
Yes, however if the Service member is in receipt of a compensation payment for a disablement due to qualifying operational service, they should retain that additional payment after 65 as recognition of service.
NZDF has identified a strong theme that recognition for service, whether it be qualifying operational service or non-operational service, is important. The fact that War Disablement Pensions are now paid by the NZDF and not Work and Income New Zealand, is one method of recognition.
Question 46 Personnel Feedback
Focus Groups – Many participants felt that New Zealand Superannuation was a fair entitlement, but did nothing to recognise their service. They further argued that there should not be a drop in the quality of life of an individual who suffered impairments during qualifying service to the crown by removing their income compensation payment at age 65, and should therefore be provided some monetary support above superannuation to help them maintain their standard of living.
Question 47
Do you think there should be difference in payment levels before and after the age of 65?
Income assistance should provide for the financial needs of the recipients. There is nothing to indicate that service personnel require additional income above that of normal citizens. However, if it is decided that an additional payment be provided to recognise qualifying operational service, this payment should not be decreased at age 65. Access to rehabilitation and medical entitlements also should not be decreased after age 65.
Previous | Contents | Next