We have four recommendations, which are spelled out in the brief.
First of all, as Sheila said, Canada has many partial basic income programs—programs that are unconditional and universal or at least universal for a demographic group.
Given the crisis we're in, we argue that these existing vehicles should be used and their benefits should be increased. For example, we have the goods and services tax credit, the guaranteed income supplement, and a recommendation for a low-income supplement to the Canada child benefit.
Secondly, the Canada disability benefit is a wonderful innovation, but there are two issues. First is its adequacy. It's just not large enough to fulfill the promise of moving most people with disabilities living in poverty out of poverty. Then, the definition in the proposed regulations is much more narrow and conditional than the definition in the act. We hope this changes quickly.
Thirdly, innovation in basic income is occurring in provinces and territories—in British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Northwest Territories and in the Yukon, which involves significant indigenous populations. These innovations, combined with Ontario's aborted pilot, are important for policy learning. We think the federal government should support them financially and technically, and offer communication and coordination.
Finally, we think that financial and human resources should be allocated to two things, which are developing a national framework for a basic income that will accommodate provincial and territorial interests, and developing a responsibility centre within the federal government for all income support programs and those conditions, like health, that are affected by income.
Thank you very much.