I think the concept of the original Veterans Charter after World War II is a good concept. I think the repackaging took catch words and catch phrases from World War II but didn't provide the substance. If we provide the same substance as existed in World War II programs to help people re-establish, then I think we can make a big step forward.
In terms of the pre-Veterans Charter population, in 1999 the study that started it all was called the Review of Veterans' Care Needs. In that study they said that the average age of CF veterans at the time was 59. Ten years later, with statistics and everything, we can probably assume that the average age has gone up maybe five or six years. So when talking about the average CF veteran, we're too late to help a lot of them, because they're over 65, for the most part, and it would be very difficult to integrate them into the workforce. But there are still, if you look at SISIP rosters, about 1,500 long-term disability clients who need some specific programs to help them integrate.
It would be my rough estimate that if we made these programs available, there might be somewhat fewer than 50,000 veterans. There are only 50,000 CF veteran clients of VAC right now. So we're not talking about a monumental expenditure of money, but we do have to consider including those CF veterans, because they were the reason—what they went through in their neglect was the reason—that the charter was created in the first place. The fact that there are not programs specifically for them is a severe tragedy.