Thank you so much, Chair.
Thank you all for being here today and for again sharing your personal circumstances and your heartfelt responses to either what you're experiencing personally or from being involved in advocating on behalf of those who this does impact.
I would like to ask a question. I'm going to ask Norma if she would respond, just to get that Pinsent feel again to this question as well, and also Robert.
In our notes, I understand that in the 2015 mandate letter for the Minister of Veterans Affairs it was a top priority to eliminate the “marriage after 60” clawback clause. Then the government abandoned this legislative route and didn't eliminate it, and instead, in budget 2019, it announced the creation of the veterans survivors fund, which we've been discussing.
It appears to me in the way it's worded here that the majority of that was initially to be spent over five years, first of all on determining what this should look like and to work with the community identified. However, what was done was solely a research effort by Professor Eric Li of the Faculty of Management at UBC. They were given a $125,000 grant from the Canadian Institute for Military and Veterans Health Research. They submitted their report in December 2020 after interviewing seven surviving spouses and three veterans.
Now, we're always told that we need a critical mass to come up with any conclusions that have weight. Do you feel that seven surviving spouses and three veterans is a fair representation of people who would be in your circumstances?
Perhaps Norma could respond first, and then Robert, if you would.