Right, lucky him.
I was going to compliment you on the shirt you wore today in question period, Charlie, but now I'm not going to.
It's a quasi-judicial body. I think we have some lawyers at the table here. It's basically hands off; we can't interfere. It's quasi-judicial. It would be like criticizing a judge for a sentence that has been handed down, if you will, in the real world of the judiciary.
This is one group I don't talk to and that I'm not allowed to talk to. In fact, when I meet some of these people at the airport, they probably think I'm rude. I just say hello and keep going. There is always the risk that I'd be attempting to interfere in a decision they have handed down.
So the ombudsman will not be able to interfere in those decisions when they've gone through a procedure, which, at the end of the day, on pensionable issues, they have a right to appeal. We're depending on the men and women on that body to make those judgments based on the legislation. We can't interfere in those decisions.
One of the things we have done since taking office, I believe, is strengthen the board. There's a qualifying test that has to be done for individuals to be on that board. Victor was appointed by the previous government. In the time we have been there and that he has been there, and I don't have any hesitation in saying this, he has done a good job in reducing that backlog. And I think he has a very credible board that's doing good work.
That's really why the ombudsman can't interfere in those types of decisions. Now, at the end of the day, they can also appeal to the Federal Court if they're not happy with the decision. We had one of those cases this year that dated way back to 1966 or 1968, and it was finally resolved by Veterans Affairs.
We have a process that works pretty well, but the ombudsman won't be able to interfere with those judicial decisions.