That sounds like it's coming together.
I'd like to move a motion that we strike a subcommittee to address persons with disabilities and some of their issues. With all due respect to Ms. Yelich, it's not just about poverty. There are many, many issues that confront the disabled community out there as they try to participate in society, whether working or in their everyday life and community. They'd like the federal government to begin to look at a strategy.
The Americans have the Americans With Disabilities Act, which has been very helpful to disabled people across that country. It's been in place for a number of years. Is that something we want to look at here in Canada, something that covers the whole gamut of life where disabled people are concerned? It puts in place regulations for public buildings, and even private businesses, so people with disabilities can have access.
They're asking us--certainly, they've asked me--to suggest and to move at this committee that a subcommittee be struck. It's not just about poverty. Certainly, the face of poverty in this country is a disabled face in many interesting and troubling respects, but it's not the only thing they're facing. The subcommittee could work parallel to this committee, get some really good work done, and come back with recommendations that we could take forward to government to make changes that would make life better for the disabled.
So I'd like to move a motion to that effect. But while I have the floor, if you don't mind, Mr. Chair, I would suggest this. I brought forward a plan a few months ago on the poverty study, and Ms. Yelich is right, and I agree with Ms. Dhalla, that this study needs to be very focused. We don't want another long drawn-out “does poverty exist, what does it look like, how do you measure it” and all of the things we often get ourselves into when we start to look at that subject. I think we should be looking at some answers, some strategy, a national anti-poverty strategy, for example, comprehensive in nature, that we could all buy into and recommend to Parliament, so the government could then hopefully take ownership of it and run with it.
In that proposal that I brought forward, and the researcher may have that, we did suggest even a bit of a timeline at the beginning, to look at, for example, and not spend a lot of time on in a concerted way, the whole question of in fact how we measure poverty. Maybe we could agree early on what that might be. I know there's work now beginning at the provincial level in at least three provinces dealing with that. One is in Ontario, and I met with some officials this morning. There's an official there, a Mr. Mendelson, I believe, who's been charged with looking at the issue of the different methods of measuring poverty in this country. I think at some point those of us who have responsibility and are charged with leadership need to decide on one and then move on a strategy to see if we can't get people at least above that line.
I'd suggest that we charge the researcher with doing some initial research and analysis. There's been a lot of work that's been done by the National Council of Welfare and by a number of institutes, the Fraser Institute, for example. There were studies done by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. If Kevin could pull some of that information together, that would be a good start for us in terms of what it is we need to be looking at as we move forward with that study.
So I'll just leave it at that.