As I said, this was on a motion to dismiss, and nothing has been decided other than that the case can continue. The argument was that the new Veterans Charter fulfills the social covenant. That's the legal position that was taken by that lawyer at that time.
One of the premises of our case is that this is not true. We'll be able to call evidence showing what the effects are and how it differs from what had gone on, just as we've heard here today.
I was looking for a battle that took place between the new Veterans Charter and the old. Theoretically, one bullet could have been fired and you'd be compensated under the Pension Act, and the next bullet out of the machine gun would be under the new Veterans Charter. We weren't able to schedule such a battle, but theoretically that could have happened. You could have had people right in the middle of the same battle with different bullets hitting them and they would have been treated markedly differently. Theoretically. I never did find that battle.