I'll make three quick points. One is that the CAF has done a pretty good job on families, on, for instance, parental leave and the way members are evaluated when they return from parental leave. There's been considerable progress made. There's still a lot of change that needs to happen, but I think the organization is doing much better here.
Inherently, organizations that are more diverse tend to perform better; they're more productive and more creative, so there's a general case to be made for diversity beyond the normative case in terms of setting the organization up for success.
The challenge that you bring up is that the CAF is on a 30-year timeline from the time you recruit someone until they actually rise to the senior ranks. Direct entry will allow us to remedy some of those shortcomings in staffing. Yes, it's about making the organization more diverse, but I think many of the skill sets that the CAF actually needs are now skill sets where the diverse components of Canadian society are disproportionately represented. Bringing people in laterally not only makes the organization more diverse; it also helps us remedy some of those shortcomings. The problem is within the current framework for recruitment, but also within the current framework for remuneration. This is extremely hard to do, in part, because remuneration is tied to rank. The CAF has resisted, tooth and nail, changing the system for remuneration that might decouple rank from remuneration.