Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Yes, I agree with my colleagues; this has been extremely helpful this morning, Mr. Kokkonen.
Mention was made of the infrastructure that most notably the Legion has. There isn't one member without at least one Legion. In the case of my large northern Ontario riding, there are about 18 different legions. They are so well represented throughout our smaller communities, it would be a shame to lose any of that infrastructure. Those buildings are located so conveniently for people, so not only would it be a shame to lose them, but I think it would also be a shame not to better utilize them.
Mention was made of some 57 organizations representing different facets of the military veteran. This is understandable because there's a certain comradeship, given a theatre of operation or similar experiences.
But is it generally accepted by veterans at the legions that if the federal government—and I know this is a recommendation that hopefully we'll discuss this fall, as we continue this study—were interested in finding ways with the legions in particular, because of the buildings, and other organizations to deliver programs to help disabled veterans, injured veterans, whether there are physical or mental injuries, such as operational stress injury, PTSD...? Do you think there's any merit in at least looking at the possibility of helping the legions help the federal government help veterans in a more proactive way by delivering some programs?
I don't want to get into what those could be—that's to be discussed—but it might be an opportunity for the legions to become a contractor, to receive some income to help the federal government deliver to veterans certain kinds of programs. Is there any merit in that at all?
It might maintain the buildings. At the same time, because the legions are so close to the communities, their ability to deliver might be well beyond the ability of the federal government to deliver any other way.