All right.
He said that he didn't believe that the population was dwindling for VAC but would be increasing. One of the concerns was whether VAC was ready for the possible surge of injuries resulting from recent conflicts. He said:
To clarify, I was trying to identify the fact it does not make sense when the cuts are based on a dwindling population. It does not matter where the cuts will be if you use a dwindling population as an excuse because it is growing on one side, although it may not be dwindling as fast as we expected on the other side. If the reduction is based on a dwindling population, it is not correct.
You've read that, have you?