Thank you for being here.
I have a few questions along the same lines as the ones asked by Mr. Oliphant.
You talked about the lump-sum award and compared it to the monthly allowance paid prior to the introduction of the New Veterans Charter.
For some time now, we have noticed certain problems. For various reasons, young soldiers returning from a mission experienced post-traumatic stress syndrome or other types of trauma associated with their tour of duty. They were awarded a lump-sum amount under the terms of the New Veterans Charter.
At times, after two or three years, they are at a point where they want to reintegrate civilian life, but that transition is hard for them because of the trauma they experienced during their military missions. Some have spent all of their lump-sum award. Of course, ideally they should purchase a home or invest their money “wisely” or strategically for the long term. However, that is not what really happens sometimes.
In cases like this, do you provide some kind of support, some kind of financial support to help them along? It is not easy, because a person can claim that it's their money to do with as they please.
So then, these young people have spent the money and are often dependent on others. They are dependent on their families, because they have spent everything within the space of two or three years. That is a problem.
Quickly, since the introduction of the New Veterans Charter, compared to the situation that existed in the past, overall, have the amounts of the allowances provided increased, or decreased? Has providing a lump-sum award instead of a monthly allowance resulted in savings, or has it proven to be a more costly initiative?