Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I was interested that three of the four opening presentations referenced the Canadian Institute for Military and Veteran Health Research. I'm quite happy to have all of the five minutes allocated to the Liberal Party spent discussing how the Government of Canada can do more with respect to the sustainability and the success of that body.
The Deputy Surgeon General states in here:
Because of the unique nature of military service and its operational, occupational, and environmental hazards, specialized applied research is necessary that very often is not, or cannot be, adequately addressed by civilian research.
I absolutely accept that and thereby the rationale for better support of the CIMVHR.
Mr. Pedlar, you very carefully chose your words—and I can understand why—when you said that VAC is engaged in providing “in-kind” support to the CIMVHR. You stated also that you “contribute heavily” to the annual Military and Veteran Health Research Forum. We see that kind of language coming from VAC in an awful lot of things where they partner with somebody else without putting in real dollars. Helmets to Hardhats comes to mind.
And Dr. Sareen, you indicated that CIMVHR aids your work.
Now, I'm sorry for the long introduction, but I invite comments from anyone on the panel as to....
I have one more thing before I hand it over to you. I know, and several of you know, that representatives from CIMVHR made a very compelling case to the finance committee of the House of Commons in the pre-budget submissions looking for funding—real, meaningful funding—for them to do their work. They didn't get it.
I'd like to hear from each of you on what the Government of Canada could and should be doing, and on what results we could achieve if they were to do what they should do with respect to CIMVHR.
Thank you.