First of all, thank you for your presentation. I think I speak for all of us around this table that we're largely in support of this legislation, subject to some of our questions today.
I'm going to follow what Mr. Hawn and quote what he was referring to:
This means that all members released for medical reasons will have five years to recover, and, once they are fit to work, be entitled to the priority right for another five-year period.
I come from a legal background. Limitation periods usually commence from the time you knew or ought to have known, and a lot of liberty is given when you discuss the definition of “ought to have known”. I won't speak for everyone, just myself. I have been involved in a number of cases where I've been acutely aware of how the medical attention given to some members of our forces has not been at its best: there have been misdiagnoses, they have been assumed to be fit and aren't, and they have died suddenly as a result of a misdiagnosis. I can give you those examples and names off the record at another time. Frankly, I'd be happy to share them. I'm speaking about those people who suffer PTSD symptoms seven years after they've been stabilized or thought to have been stabilized.
I had a thoughtful conversation with a government member of Parliament before coming here. He explained the difference to me, but I'd like you to tell us, if you could, why there is this period of five years, why there is that limitation, when we know that, notwithstanding the prognosis of someone being stabilized, it indeed isn't always the case. What happens to that person when they destabilize and start looking for another job because they lost one as a result of a manifestation years later, say, of PTSD?