If I understand the question, and I think I do, a lot of the recommendations that have been made around the table, including those made by me, are within provincial jurisdictional authority. I am in favour of using the federal spending power, but I am also in favour of doing it in what used to be called a cooperative federalist way of working with the provinces and trying one's best to get agreements for changes. I refer in this to the particular form of guaranteed income that I'm saying should be a long-range goal of Canada, which Tom Kent and Hugh Segal have also advocated.
I think those kinds of complex changes in social policy in Canada on the whole require federal-provincial agreement, if we're going to maintain the cooperative kind of attitude in the country. I don't underestimate the difficulty in achieving it, but I think federal initiatives are appropriate, even if to say, “We have money, we have the tax resource as a federal government, and in particular in the case of some provincial governments”—for reasons of inequality that have been raised already—“we're prepared to put up...”, and I'm not naming some of the programs that I mentioned, for example, that are in provincial jurisdictional authority, “and we would like you to cooperate.” That can be done using the prime ministerial pulpit, if I can put it that way, too, showing federal leadership and talking about the necessity of these things to build a more equal Canada and to put public pressure, if you like, on more provinces to get a sufficient number to have effective programs.