Thank you, Mr. Stoffer.
With respect to the first question, I can certainly advise you as follows. As you know, over the past number of years the department has profited from numerous advisory groups and bodies. The Gerontological Advisory Council was one of them; the New Veterans Charter Advisory Group was another. Those groups provided invaluable expertise and advice to us over time. Those bodies helped to formulate some of the basic principles of the new Veterans Charter. In the case of the New Veterans Charter Advisory Group, they provided invaluable commentary on the charter as proposed and on the implementation, and indeed in terms of recommendations for follow-up.
What we have found, however--and where we are at this point in time--is that the department has determined that we really need now to move away from those types of traditional groups. They took a long time to formulate reports, and because of the structure--not because of the individuals--they were sometimes not as responsive as the department now needs to be. We are now in an environment where we need to be very nimble, flexible, and able to respond to policy issues more quickly than we have in the past.
What we have done now is determined that a stakeholder advisory committee is the way of the future. As a result of that we have invited to the table a broad range of stakeholders. The first planning session of this committee was set up in June 2011, at which time our assistant deputy minister, James Gilbert, chaired a meeting with representatives from all the traditional organizations, such as the Royal Canadian Legion, the War Amputations of Canada, ANAVETS, and all those groups, as well as with some of the more modern groups, such as the Canadian Veterans Advocacy group and the NATO associations.
We now have a group with a broad range of people around the table. We'll be meeting again with them in October to finalize the terms of reference. That broad stakeholder committee will be a committee that we will look to for help in providing us with feedback on issues that are in the public domain, issues of concern to the membership around that table. They will also be a sounding board for issues that we choose to put before them to get commentary on and so on.
This is a new approach. It's a new strategy. We believe that it's innovative. We believe that it's creative. We believe it's the way to ensure broad engagement of veterans organizations. We've made a commitment to all of the individuals around that table that we will evolve with the structure as their needs and our needs evolve.
So we're moving into a new environment. We're moving into a new era. It will not be new to any of the members of the committee that government generally, Veterans Affairs for sure, has to be equally as responsive to the modern groups as to the traditional. Some of the modern groups are not as organized structurally, but they have a great deal of influence in terms of the social media. They have a broad reach, and we need to engage those folks. That's what we are trying to do now through the advisory committee.
In terms of the second question you posed, on the privacy issue, I can assure the committee members here that the Department of Veterans Affairs took this issue exceedingly seriously. It was most unfortunate and regrettable as it unfolded. As a result of that, working with the Privacy Commissioner and with our advisors in central agencies on privacy issue management the department embarked on a very ambitious privacy management action plan to address the concerns and to assure veterans that the information they share with us will be secure, it will be protected, and they should not have concerns into the future.
Elements of that privacy action plan include broad-based training of every employee, reminding them of the basic principles of privacy in information management. I think we're in a good position.
The chair is indicating the need to move on.