I've talked about this quite often, and so have my predecessor and every one of the predecessors before that. I always ask a question like, “Okay, why is it going to be greener on the other side of the fence?” In that regard, I have three main issues.
One is that I feel we can serve our constituents better in that regard. It provides more accountability for Parliament to provide oversight of a military institution. I think that's a good thing. That's what Parliament is all about—to provide oversight of, in this case, the military and all the forces.
However, the main one I see as the greatest benefit is compelling the department to respond in a timely manner and holding it accountable for the recommendations we make. That is the one area—as I've said lately and over the last number of years since I started—in which we're seeing the responses get slower and slower. Yes, they may have been accepted in the end, but we're left to see whether they're going to accept them or not, and what they are going to do about them.
In fact, the department works on it very quickly, but we're seeing slower and slower responses, and that's not a good thing for—