First of all, I want to go back and make a point. They do participate in military operations, such as search and rescue, surveillance on the land, those types of things. Those are militarily instructed functions. That puts them into that fray.
To go back to my earlier response, when we look at that community and we look at some of the things that are inherent in that community—diabetes comes to mind quickly, as does heart disease—those things happen much more frequently in that community than they do in others. If we decide that universality of service will be applied, you won't have rangers in the north. This is what I talk about when I say to go to the community and talk to those people. They manage themselves very well. They are very self-sufficient and very able to respond as we demand.
I know there is talk right now. The chief of the defence staff has said they're going to look at universality of service across the board. I think that is a good thing going forward. I think we should allow that to come to fruition. But I don't think imposing, again, a south of 60 policy on north of 60 will help our national security or allow us to grow the rangers at the pace that we would like.