Thank you, Chair.
Again, thank you for being here as witnesses.
I mentioned that Sidney Crosby was a constituent of mine, and I can tell you there's another great constituent of mine, among many. All of you know Steven Estey, who is working hard today with you guys in the work that you're doing. I look forward to seeing him this evening at the reception.
It was as a result of a discussion with him and with the support of the chair and the indulgence of the committee that we asked you to be here today. I think you've hit upon where we need to be now that we've agreed to do a study on disability issues, and that is to determine what the right study is.
Some members of this committee--I'm sure Madame Folco, Mr. Lessard, and perhaps others--have been involved in some of those studies on disability issues. I think this is really useful for us.
Your suggestion, Michael, about article 33 is perhaps the kind of thing I think we need to have a consensus to zero in on. We have to decide that as a committee.
One issue we've been looking at in the very early stages, just in discussions about doing this study, is that of bringing people with disabilities into the workforce in a better way, to maximize their potential and also the potential of the country. We're wasting a lot of human potential.
One issue I come back to is that there are a lot of people who could be much more gainfully employed for their benefit and the benefit of society. On the other hand, there are some people who are going to need help for the rest of their lives. I think of a conversation I had with a couple back home who I've known for a long time. They called me about their daughter. She's now 22. At the age of 21 you have to leave high school. I see this all the time with kids who have gone to high school, have done very well, and have benefited from being in school with other kids, and the kids have benefited from them. Then, all of a sudden they're forced out of school at the age of 21 in Nova Scotia and there's no place for them to go. They fall off a cliff in terms of society. We have to make sure we bring people into the workforce. That's a huge piece.
The other piece is that there are some people that we just have an obligation to. I want to ask you about one of the recommendations in the Senate report, which is the idea of a basic annual income for people with disabilities. In essence, we have that for seniors with the GIS and the OAS. The idea that Hugh Segal has certainly championed is the basic annual income more broadly, but I think the report zeroed in on people with severe disabilities. I wonder if anybody would comment on that.