Okay. I understand your position.
Ms. MacEwen, I don't know if I am exaggerating by describing the situation as follows, but I think that, even today, more women than men accept part-time positions to be able to take care of children. Given that social reality, which is still very relevant, it is more likely that women will fall into the category of people who have not earned $6,500 or more.
When a child becomes ill, logically, the important parent is the one who has spent a lot of time at home and worked little. However, that parent is more likely to be denied access to the benefits. What should be done in those situations? Should the parent who earns $60,000 a year stop working to take care of children, although they have taken care of them little over the previous year, so that the other parent can return to the labour market? Do you see what type of situation this may lead to? I am thinking about my wife and me trying to deal with that kind of a situation.