I think the statistic we had from Quebec was a $5.1 billion increase in GDP. I think if you take that across the country, you will see that putting in a national child care system or a variety of systems that comprise a national system would actually increase Canada's GDP. That's why they say it's a revenue-positive program—you don't necessarily get the money exactly where you put it in.
For example, when the federal government sponsors child care programs across the country, province to province it is not going to necessarily reap the direct benefits of decreasing the number of mothers on social assistance, because those are provincial programs. But I think we have to remember at base that it is coming out of one pocket, that there is a single taxpayer, and it's up to governments to invest it in a way that benefits everyone and not be too fussed about whether this is a provincial benefit from a federal investment.
In the countries that do have it, you see that it's very positive and very positive with regard to women's contribution. From where we sit, given the changes in women's workforce participation and education, what are we forgoing by having women unable to participate fully in the workforce when they are so educated and motivated? At the same time the benefits to the children are really immense. For every program we look at, whether it's for women who are leaving violent relationships or women who are homeless, a national child care system is of benefit all the way across.