I think that's a fundamental misstep that legislators can make, and I don't think that's been done in this case. Two examples immediately come to mind, but there may be others. First of all, there's the idea that on the board of CASDO, more than 50% of individuals have lived experience. The technical committees of that body will also be significantly comprised of people with lived experience.
The second piece is the requirement for federally regulated entities to create accessibility plans. Those plans must be done in conjunction with and in consultation with citizens with disabilities. Progress reports have to be done in consultation with Canadians with disabilities. Every step of this process that we've put in this law has, as far as I can tell, a requirement for the ongoing participation of Canadians with disabilities.