Right.
At the risk of repeating earlier comments, the importance of the urban development agreement, which was in process, was that it was identifying gaps on the ground and relaying that to other levels of government. That process has stopped.
I'd like to come back to literacy cuts. Really, of all the cuts, I found those the most egregious and the most difficult to understand, even in conservative terms of productivity. There were different reasons given--i.e., we don't want to fund advocacy, or we don't want to fund programs that don't reflect the federal or that are beyond the federal jurisdiction.
That said, one type of project that was beginning in different parts of the country was the development of what was called the “learning community”. The idea was to join up different agencies and different groups and different educational service providers and social providers and link them up in order to better deliver services. This is an initiative that was getting off the ground in Victoria, and it's one that I was really excited about. It looks like the national secretariat of learning is not one of the programs that is going to continue. However, we don't know what the cuts will be.
Do you think that kind of learning community, providing support and bringing people together, would be useful to address some of the issues? Perhaps you would comment on that.