Thank you, and thanks to the witnesses for coming.
I have a couple of quick comments.
I want to thank the Saskatchewan Mining Association for raising the issues around training, that not only is it a cost, but there actually are savings as a result of that by having people perhaps no longer on provincial assistance. I think that often gets missed when we're talking about this; we treat training and education as a cost. I think it's an important factor that we have to keep in mind.
Also, for Vale, there's the issue around turnover. There is a significant cost, as you well know, to employers on turnover. When we talk about the productivity lag in Canada, one of the factors is the cost to businesses when they turn over employees. When you have a 50% turnover, that's an enormous cost to businesses.
The third thing I want to touch on, and this is where my question will go, is K to 12. I think Mr. Stewart mentioned K to 12, and I know certainly Mr. Merasty has talked about this in the past. If you can't get students out of grade 12, there is already a problem with them going on to apprenticeship and other technical or post-secondary education. You rightly made the comment that it's not business' responsibility to make sure people are graduating from grade 12, and yet you can't find workers if you don't have people graduating.
I know that there have been a couple of successful initiatives around that, but what else do you think needs to be done? Maybe I'll start with Saskatchewan, because you have a problem getting in here because of the format.
Give me one specific recommendation that the committee should consider around K to 12.