First of all, thanks very much for the question because it is absolutely fundamental.
As I mentioned before, about three-quarters of the clientele who come to VAC come after their release, so they have left the Canadian Armed Forces either on retirement or voluntarily and then come to us at some point in the future. One of the key aspects is, are we standardized across the board in terms of attribution of service and non-service? I think it's absolutely terrific that the Canadian Armed Forces are holding on to these men and women until everything is done. While they're in uniform, they have the best medical care the country can provide. They have their income for as long as they stay in uniform, which is absolutely terrific. I can't comment upon an individual case; it would be inappropriate. Keep in mind that the minister's responsibility under the new Veterans Charter is for service-related injuries. At the same time, the crown pays for a significant portion of the service income security insurance plan program, SISIP. The key purpose it's there is non-service related and, based upon the program arrangement we have, it's also the first payer for both service and non-service. Even if for the individual—and I'm not talking about a specific case—their injuries are not attributed to service, then they have the full SISIP program, upon which the new Veterans Charter will pay.