I'll start.
EI is a program that has a threshold of eligibility, and if you don't meet the threshold of eligibility, then you're not going to be able to get the benefits.
The reason I started out by mentioning 10 different disability systems, 10 different bureaucracies and 10 different definitions of disability—even multiple definitions within the programs—is that each of these various silos is very interested in what the others pay out.
As Deborah pointed out, she was going to receive benefits from the one, but they're not only interested in the definition, but also the pedigree of the disability. Did it take place in the auto accident, or did it take place on the job, or did it take place somewhere else? There are all these questions that get involved in the essential bureaucracy.
Again, in mentioning the idea of some sort of basic income, if we could somehow combine or disentangle these 10 different bureaucracies that came in at various times with different definitions and different concepts of what a disability is, there has to be, as part of that, at least some sort of reckoning, maybe some massive saving within the system, if we were able to disentangle ourselves from these definitions of pedigree, and each one that overlaps with and deducts from the other.
Going back to Deborah's testimony and the idea of getting CPP, if she finally does get benefits from the Ontario disability support program, then her CPP will be deducted at 100% from those payments.
There's often the idea that the programs, in the end—especially for people who are living in poverty with disabilities and with episodic disabilities—become destitution-based. When they're destitution-based, they're very, very complicated. I think the eligibility requirements, at a minimum, are overly complex.