I'll just add a couple of comments as well.
First of all, you mentioned the idea of a grace period, rather than having it cut off in that week. You commented that you didn't know how that would look. I don't think it would be that difficult to do. It would simply be a recommendation from this committee that there be a change to a period of time after which the benefits cease to exist. That would be a very easy change to make to allow people a little time before they have to start to approach Service Canada and things like that. That would be simple, very easy, for this committee to recommend, and very easy to do.
The other thing I'll point out is—and it's been raised a number of times by different members—whether there are other ways this can be done. The idea has been raised about the CCB. I'm not certain that this is going to be something that will replace the income of people so they don't have to go back to work. I'm not sure that particular program is necessarily the one that's going to do it unless you're going to increase it significantly in the period of time at that point.
If these questions are being asked and the ideas are being circulated that way with a genuine belief that we have to make sure we meet those principles, I'm certainly supportive of other ways that this can be done. The EI system is the one that was identified previously as one that was set up in the best way. It's something that exists already.
Having said that, if out of a genuine place people are looking for other avenues, fine, as long as it's something that will allow people the amount of time they need to grieve and as long as it is going to replace the income so they don't have to consider going back to work.
There are a lot of people who don't have family, friends or support. Organizations like Quinn's Legacy Run Society are very helpful for people who are aware that they exist, but it's not something that they're going to be necessarily aware of, unfortunately, so we have to make sure that whatever we do meets those principles.
I urge the committee to make sure you're thinking about it that way and not just simply trying to find a way to put it somewhere else. Make sure it's done with the principle in mind that we have to ensure that we're providing something that's going to be possible for everyone to access. It should be able to replace a little bit of income so that people don't have to consider going back to work within days of their child passing away.
As you very correctly pointed out, Mr. Ruimy, it's not something that people ever expect. We prepare for the idea that our parents at one point are going to pass away. We prepare for the fact that our spouse might pass away at some point and we have life insurance and savings to deal with that, but nobody's ever thinking about that when they're about to have a child, so we're not prepared. Most times, of course, it's people early in their life, and there aren't savings yet because they're just getting started, so this is not something that most people are prepared for. Financially, it can put people in a very difficult position, and we have to consider that as well.