Veterans Valued?

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#1
For nearly 500 years the Royal Navy struggled on without a Veterans Minister. We have now been blessed with dozens of them with their expensive staffs and offices.
What have they achieved for us/we veterans?

1. A Veterans Badge. Worn on the lapel resembling a lesser Union Shop Steward. Numerous Veterans Ministers have been photographed pinning on--and will no doubt continuing glorifying in such occasions
2. A free phone line.
3. Still to come and even more exciting, a "V" on our driving licences to act as an Identity Card to show, clearly, we would have laid down our lives for our country.
Those without driving licences need not write in as a new card with a "V" on will be available.

If any of you have a War Pension card advising hospitals to provide priority treatment for its bearer's named disabilities, you will have prior experience of just how useless the new cards will be.
More money down the drain.
 
#2
Was the now well established Veterans Agency not a result of having a Veteran's minister? They were very helpful to me when it came to sorting out my pension.
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#3
How do you imagine pensions were dealt with before 2006?
Ratings pensions began in c.1653 and for all officers in 1836.
They seem to have muddled by. My own father from WW1and WW2 service received exemplary treatment.
 

Seadog

War Hero
Moderator
#4
‘Veterans’ Minister’ is a little misleading. Responsibility for veterans is one brief on a much larger portfolio for which he or she already has staff. A bit like being Mess President.



Perhaps rather than asking, what use is a Veterans’ Minister, ask if the Minister or his predecessors have done any harm.
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#5
‘Veterans’ Minister’ is a little misleading. Responsibility for veterans is one brief on a much larger portfolio for which he or she already has staff. A bit like being Mess President.



Perhaps rather than asking, what use is a Veterans’ Minister, ask if the Minister or his predecessors have done any harm.
Doing good requires a "problem" needing a remedy. Doing no harm has no such trigger.



Doing good is to make the proponent feel good, regardless of results. Doing no harm looks toward … well, dog-gone it, no harm!
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
N The Fleet 41
Jenny_Dabber Charity 21
G Current Affairs 12

Similar threads

Latest Threads