I agree that the question here is, what is broken that we need an ombudsman to fix? At the last meeting, the only reason I could see was the statement made that there was a sense of mistrust out there and that an ombudsman was needed as an advocate for veterans looking for a way to approach, I guess, the department.
We need to understand why there's that mistrust before we can get back to what the role of the ombudsman would be. I'm a little bit confused, and I agree exactly with what you're saying, that before we can move on, we've got to find out what the role of the ombudsman should be.
My concern from the last witnesses was with the volume the Veterans Review and Appeal Board was going through and whether it was an issue that things weren't moving along fast enough. Do you think the delivery from the department is timely, or do you think that's an issue that something like an ombudsman would speed up and I guess provide better access for veterans?