This is a question we get a lot, and that's why I addressed the benefit trap at the beginning of my comments. I just want to say that it's called a “benefit trap” because it's not a benefit choice. In traditional income support models, it becomes a trap; not working becomes the rational thing to do.
If there were a tailored model for Canada that took into account demographics and our population and our unique context, we wouldn't see that happening. The major leap for most people in terms of implementing a universal basic income is a sort of pessimism about human nature. If there's one thing social workers know—and I don't think you've called us as witnesses here because of our expertise in macroeconomics—it's that people want to contribute. They want to be valuable. They want to be productive in society. If they're given the tools to do so, they will. We know that if people are lifted above the poverty line, that goes right back into local businesses, like the mom-and-pop grocery store.
So no, we haven't done the economic research on it, although I would point you in the direction of the study that I cited, which is from the Roosevelt Institute in the U.S. I can actually provide that to the clerk afterwards as well.