Thank you.
I think on the whole issue of trying to make something national, it is not in our interests to force the provinces and the federal government to spend more time fighting about their jurisdictions. Rather, we are looking for some uniformity, some uniform standards, some portability of the different duties and monetary values that might be applied. And it is also important to have a national standard large enough to get the public's attention and put it to the front of the political agenda.
So the national aspects of it don't require an absolute national or singular perspective, but rather there needs to be some measure of uniformity and universality, so that it's in each province, not just some of them. And the levels and standards should be uniform as well. It's from that standpoint that we argue for a national caregiver strategy.
I think very little has been said about the details in the public debate, as everybody is stuck talking about whether or not we should talk about it. I think we need to get beyond that. We can start examining options that other people have tried in other countries. There are also smatterings of support for the caregiver role in the provinces. Some of it is attitudinal, that is, the health care systems—which, of course, are provincially run—need to recognize the role of the caregiver and facilitate that with assisted services, and so on.
Finally, I think the other reason for having a fairly high national profile for this issue is to ensure that workplaces actually accommodate the caregiver role, so that they keep their jobs. Really, we should use the maternity/paternity leave model, a comprehensive approach to recognizing an important public good, so that all of the systems that would support the role are pulled into play.