Thank you.
I was just questioning why we had to come up with a different term. The argument was that they were younger. One of the arguments was that hundreds of thousands of volunteers and conscripts who took part in the First World War, Second World War, and Korean War were proportionally.... The changing of it to “modern-day veterans” is because we are dealing with proportionally much smaller numbers of military personnel now who made their careers in the CAF in the decades that followed.
I don't understand why, if there was a smaller number of military personnel proportionally compared to those who served in those initial wars, we felt we needed to make a change to their funding.
Am I hearing you right? Are you saying that you, as Minister of Veterans Affairs, could not determine this for Gulf War veterans? Couldn't we change it to wartime service? The veterans minister couldn't make that designation, could she?