I might answer quickly on one point you raised, the point that there has to be a delineation between still-serving members getting their services in the OTSSC clinics and the veterans getting their services in the OSI clinics. The reality is that there is a capacity problem in mental health. There are just not enough mental health providers. In addition, both of these clinics provide services not only to the clients but also to their families, so here we have the dual problem of a family of a still-serving member also possibly facing a transition to a different process.
To a degree, the recommendations I made are actually symbolic. If we can call them at least by the same nomenclature--and sometimes there is a certain visibility to nomenclature--they're all OSI clinics, operational stress injury clinics. Eventually they all serve the same members. There have been some discussions in actually trying to ensure that you can get services from either clinic, because they don't have a footprint across the country; they have a footprint, but not a sufficiently wide footprint. Let's say a Canadian Forces member may be at a base where there's no OTSSC clinic, but there is an OSI clinic. Why should he go three hours down the road to get his services at the Canadian Forces clinic when he could get them at the VAC clinic?
This was an item of suggestion, not an item of discussion, not only between the Canadian Forces and VAC but also with the RCMP. We were seeing progress. Unfortunately, I think the turf wars have re-established the ground rules that we will stay separate.
You asked for a simple recommendation; I gave you a simple recommendation. Capacity is a problem, so let's open up these clinics where there's a need and not force people to drive three hours down the road to the other clinic because that's the clinic that's been designated to provide their mental health, keeping in mind that families are also recipients of that mental health.