Actually, without realizing it, Mr. Chair, you supported the point I was making about not pursuing this. To me, the only open questions have to do with the legality, along with points that my colleague is making about the proper title of this series of statements.
I think it would be incumbent.... If the government members feel we should continue this, I would expect that the minister would at least ask us to continue it. It's out there, and if the minister doesn't ask us to look at what's on the website, then it is a fait accompli, and we should essentially move on, except for the questions about what you call it, what its proper title is, and what the legalities are around the so-called rights that are being provided.
I'm still where I was. I feel we should terminate this except for a letter to the minister. You might want to include, if colleagues agree, asking the minister, “Do you want us to look at this? Are you serious about us actually...? Are you interested in actually hearing our views?”
I doubt the minister will be interested, quite frankly, because it's on the website now. I don't think it says “draft” on the website, and with great respect to the Prime Minister, I don't remember his saying that this is a proposal to be considered by anybody. It was laid out there. I'm not sure if I agree exactly with.... I didn't feel insulted; I felt that this is politics. It was a very political statement.
Maybe it's within the Prime Minister's right to do whatever he wants in a certain area, but it's our job to respond appropriately. And it's my view that we need to be responsible to our veterans and make sure they know what it is they're getting.