We'll watch our watch. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
First of all, I'd like to concur with Mr. Poilievre that in terms of 65,000 or 70,000 people, and it costing $108 million or whatever in terms of providing assistance, there must be some regional health authority somewhere that you can draw on. If we look at the Canadian costs of health, if every little regional health authority needed $100 million to provide its data, that certainly would seem to be a tremendous amount of money.
I'd like to first of all be able to recognize that.... You know, I read the audit report in terms of qualifications, in terms of accreditation, in terms of upgrading, and it was rather shocking. I'm glad to hear that the major-general has information for us today to indicate that there has been significant improvement. I'm not sure in terms of pharmacists--there still is a little spread there--but for doctors and nurses and that, it seems you're making considerable improvements.
Now, if we go back to when I was in the service, we had an old system known as PULHEMS. It dealt with people who entered and who were assessed in terms of their medical proficiencies. The “M” was for mental health.
Today we have a lot of soldiers, sailors, and air people leaving the forces, and if we were to look at them today, would there be any indication of a serious concern with a change in M--for example, people coming in assessed as M-1, using the old system, going out as an M-4 or an M-5, and needing medical attention in the civil society? Do you have any information or any data on that?