Mr. Chairman, we don't have the time to go into the evolving new Veterans Charter. As General Dallaire said very succinctly this afternoon, it was an ongoing process, but for reasons—dare I say it here, perhaps political expedience?—the new Veterans Charter was brought forward and it was given swift passage, as we've heard. Even senior members of the Veterans Affairs staff, including the late Jack Stagg, who was the deputy minister, said that it was unfinished legislation and they needed more time. But it was brought before the House and, as we know, passed unanimously in a day.
There were gaps that were identified. The business that was identified, again by General Dallaire, of the lump sum was not part of the discussions. There was Dr. Neary's study, and that was part of it, but there was also ongoing work within Veterans Affairs and the finance committee, probably the Treasury Board also, on how to take this document forward.
We talked about the philosophy of dedication and duty, but that wasn't a topical issue. The underlying sort of premise of the discussions was how they could save money. That was in the time when the government of the day was focused on trying to save money, so there were some adjustments made that surprised all the veterans advisory groups involved in working committees and one thing and another. For literally years those observations and concerns were overridden, and the bill presented.
But I go back to Jack Stagg, who was the deputy minister. He was a key and instrumental player, and he was very concerned when it went through so quickly that, as he said, and I just said now, it was unfinished legislation. We have paid the price of that for the last nine years.