Thank you for the question.
I think in regard to the supports question, you really raise a bigger issue, and that is that the majority of supports and services are in fact in provincial jurisdiction, and there is a difficulty for the federal government to address that delivery of supports and services. I think, predominately, supports and services are not readily available. They're not portable. They're not flexible. Families and individuals have to insert themselves into an existing support system.
I talked earlier about the need for reform of our systems, and it sort of gets at some of the questions asked earlier, as well, about affordability. In many ways, I don't think this is about pouring new money into existing systems. If existing systems aren't working, new money doesn't help them. We need to be really looking at how our systems and support services are best designed. But it gets to that notion that FPT governments have to come together to talk particularly about the issue of supports.
And where do we go? I think that's where we go. I think it is intricately linked with the income support idea. We know probably the number one reason people live in poverty is that they do not have the supports they need—the supports to go to school, to get a job, to keep their job, to live and be part of their communities. Until we can address that piece.... It's similar around the legislation piece. A poverty act could be great, but if it's not dealing with why people are experiencing such staggering rates of poverty, where's it going to get us?
So I think the supports issue cannot be addressed in isolation. I don't think it can be addressed solely by the federal government, and I think the supports reform has to be linked into income reform as well.