Thank you for that question. I don't know that I intended to give any kind of implication that this was your position.
Fundamentally, the recommendations that we're making are not about spending billions of dollars more; they're about let's spend these dollars in ways that address equity concerns that exist as structural outcomes of the ways in which these programs are set up.
There are women, folks from racialized communities, and others who are systemically disadvantaged in our society. In terms of the benefit programs that I'm talking about, that is a result of the ways in which the labour market doesn't work very well. We see that women, people from racialized communities, and people from historically disadvantaged groups have differential access to the labour market. When you have benefit programs that are based on labour market participation, you're necessarily going to get a disproportionate, negative impact on those people who are already negatively impacted.
I understand your point about costing. Again, I would point to the Alternative Federal Budget, which is a document that attempts to address issues around social spending from a financial and a budgetary perspective—