Mr. Chair, thank you to the member for the question.
I'll start with the second question. It's not the type of thing you can simply do once every five, 10, or 35 years to make sure the plan is working. You have to look at it on a constant basis. There's everything from the 90-day reports we get from PSPIB to look every 90 days at how the funding is working to the work we are constantly doing with the office of the chief actuary to revisit not only the assumptions we've made but whether or not there are other assumptions we haven't thought of yet that we should bring in. There is constant analysis and review of changes in things like longevity or mortality rates, morbidity rates, and other things like that. There is the type of work the chief actuary has talked about in terms of working with his peers to make sure the analysis that his office brings to it is constantly as up to date as possible.
Then we also look at the nature of the plan itself, which goes to the work, for example, that we need to do on the funding plan that recognizes the cycle of life that the pension plan is in. Obviously our obligations in the post-2000 plan are very different from what they were in the pre-2000 plan. Bringing all of those things together is part of the key work we do to ensure sustainability. Again, you do that constantly, not just sort of periodically.
I'll let my colleague l'actuaire en chef talk to the longevity issues, because he's the real expert there.