Mr. Chair, the proposed amendment that Mr. Côté alluded to suggests that eligibility be granted to those who experience “a severe physical or psychological impairment”.
I think to clarify for the committee's sake, the original wording of the bill already included those with psychological impairment, so the amendment is redundant. The addition of the words “physical or psychological”, and the removal of the reference to “severe interference in their quality of life”, could limit eligibility. We would never differentiate between a physical or mental wound. They should be valued and treated equally. Furthermore, the department needs the capacity to evaluate how a condition impacts the veteran's quality of life.