You're right. It's hard to be excited about this, and these survey results are from five years ago. For a department that spends billions on health care funding, to use survey results from five years ago that health care is good in your community, or a percentage of eligible first nations and Inuit who received a benefit, that doesn't tell me anything. Are they in good health or not? I think that should be the performance indicator. If you receive a benefit because you're diabetic or suffering from an ailment, that's not a good indicator. If few people receive a benefit in a community, it might be an excellent thing because they're very healthy.
I think that speaks to the problem of not having good performance indicators. For the ones we heard, except for the ones who reported being in good or excellent health.... That, I think, is good. The rest is worth what it's worth, in my humble opinion.