I appreciate both of those examples. I think it will behoove the committee to research those even further to find out...who knows, maybe Australia is in the cards. Rodger likes that.
The other part of my comment, and I'd like your response to it, is that many of these things, from a government point of view, involve both provinces and the federal government. It's the coordination part. Through my life experience as a parent of someone in this category, I find the departments don't communicate with each other, federally and provincially. As well, the provincial governments are all different. As a result, what you have are these disincentives being built in as an unforeseen consequence of one level of government thinking it's doing a good thing in producing new programs and new supports.
That relates to my comment earlier about the massive job that needs to be done on this file. Many of these things are provincial, more so even than federal, as I think you would agree.
I would like you to provide some insights as to how at the federal level, as legislators, we can move this process forward. There are the obvious things, of course, to start talking to the provinces, but it isn't that easy. I guess what I'm asking is should we take more control of this agenda, where one level or another kind of backs away while the other takes care of it? There are many disincentives in the program, as we all know, that really do need correction.
I would appreciate your comments on that. I will end with you responding to those comments.