The Parliamentary Budget Officer—I do not know at whose behest—in 2019, when the pension for life was announced, decided to compare the regimes of benefits pre-2006, which was under the Pension Act; post-2006 to 2019, up to the pension for life, which was called the new veterans charter; and then the pension for life afterwards.
In those three cohorts, he looked at the veterans who were anticipated to apply for benefits between 2019 and 2024. He then did the costing, principally focused upon the disability, pain and suffering compensation, because the income loss is the same for all veterans. The veterans who came before 2006 are on the income loss program, as they are up until 2019 and afterwards. They would all have received benefits from improvements to income loss.
The big difference was—we're talking about apples and oranges—income loss versus pain and suffering payments. The courts recognize that distinction. Focusing on the pain and suffering payments, he looked at that cohort of veterans, and he found that over their lifetimes, were they to be paid under the Pension Act, it would cost around $50 billion to pay for their benefits. However, under the 2006 program, if I'm not mistaken, he anticipated that the present clients.... I'm sorry: It was both present clients and the future cohort that would be $50 billion.
Under scenario two, which was the new veterans charter or the Veterans Well-being Act, it would be $29 billion, and the pension for life would be $32 billion.
That's an $18-billion differential between pension for life and if they were covered under Pension Act payments. It's quite significant.