What I was referring to is that perhaps the eligible recipient could draw down those 26 weeks over a two-year period in different blocks of hours, rather than saying, “You're eligible. You take it for 15 or you take it for 26 straight weeks.” Again, that may help some people with episodic disabilities, but it certainly won't help a lot of people with episodic disabilities, so it's about building in some flexibility.
Whether we leave it at 15 or we take it at 26, or some groups call for 35, whatever it is, can we deliver that in a more flexible, person-centred way that actually responds to the realities of people's lives?