Thank you, Mr. Walbourne, so much for being here today. I do share your angst with regard to the fact that so many studies have been done. When I was new to the House at the beginning of our term two years ago, my first question to this committee was why are we restudying this? Why don't we look at what was recommended unanimously in the previous report and at what is and isn't being done at this point?
I would think it would be part of the role of this committee as well to hold the powers that be to the recommendations that we put forward to see if they are being implemented the way we suggested they would.
You mentioned in your opening statement that senior leadership needs to be held accountable with regard to implementation. Then when questioned, you also said you couldn't really speak to why it's not being implemented.
On page 8 of your report, “Simplifying the Service Delivery Model for Medically Releasing Members”, you make a statement:
A willingness by the Canadian Armed Forces to state on the release message whether an injury or illness is attributable to or aggravated by service—and that the Canadian Armed Forces determination be presumed by Veterans Affairs Canada to be sufficient evidence to support an application for benefits—would open the door for significant improvements in the delivery of service.
The elephant in the room is the willingness side of things. Why is there a lack of willingness, it seems, and where does the buck stop on that willingness to make these changes?