Subpoena power is another issue that's still ongoing. It's an ongoing discussion. There's an obligation in the statute for the Canadian Forces and the department to basically give our board everything we require. We don't have an issue with that. We don't have a problem. What we request we get, sometimes easily, sometimes a little bit later. But we always get around it and get what we need to adjudicate on a case, i.e., provide the finding, a recommendation to the CDS.
Where the problem lies is that for everyone who's no longer in the Canadian Forces, the Canadian Forces or the department cannot help us acquire that information. If we're looking to acquire a piece of information that belongs to a retired member, short of holding a hearing and then potentially having to go before the courts because we don't have that power, we would have to go into a hearing, and have that member testify. If he or she doesn't come or doesn't want to provide the evidence, then we go to court and have a judgment to have that enforced. It's just a question of an ability to have the proper tool, when required. It's not to subpoena a CF member because we can have a hearing for that and we have no relationship problem for acquiring information. It's mainly for those cases.
I had a case last year where I came very close to having to have a hearing only to get a piece of information. I decided not to go there because it was the griever, and I said in that particular case if he didn't want to help his case, I wasn't going to hold a hearing for that. But had he been a witness, I would have had to hold a hearing, which is costly and time consuming.
Part of my mandate in the legislation is that I must do things as efficiently and fast as possible. The subpoena would actually alleviate that problem of going to a hearing and potentially to court to have a piece of evidence submitted to the board. That's why we're seeking that.