Thank you.
As an outsider without the experience of the members across, when I look at the renderings from the two artists, I can see why veterans tend to prefer one over the other. One is more abstract. It's very artistic; it's beautiful also. The other one actually shows soldiers. It's tangible. You can tell what it's commemorating.
I don't know if the committee has already discussed this or not, but I don't know why we can't build two monuments. Afghanistan was a huge mission for Canada. Why not build both monuments, one on either side of the country? I don't know if that's something that this committee has discussed or contemplated, but I don't think it would cost that much or be beyond the pale to go ahead and do both artists' renderings. The stories from both artists are great. They're both good ways to commemorate that mission in Afghanistan.
I don't know why we're more concerned about what the artists think than what the veterans think. From what I understand, more than 12,000 Canadian veterans have responded to have their say about this monument. Our government is listening to them, unlike the previous government, which made them angry because it didn't consult with them at all.
I'm frankly kind of stunned that we're still talking about this. This is such a big issue. I think I want to hear from the witnesses. I want to hear more about the transition to civilian life, and I don't understand why we're having these debates on and on. It makes sense to me that we choose the monument that the veterans feel most represents their time in Afghanistan.
Thank you.