Thank you for the question.
In our work on the Canada disability benefit, we expect—and the minister talked about this at committee—that there may be interactions with other federal programs, as well as provincial and territorial programs. She made it very clear in her testimony that the intention of the design of the benefit is to ensure that it does not interact with those programs and that there are no negative interactions or clawbacks regarding them.
Given the sense of this amendment and what's being proposed here, I'll take the member's question in backwards order.
In terms of provincial and territorial governments and interactions with provincial income-tested programs, the only way to do this is through their legislative, regulatory or policy processes, and there is an array of them. Each of those programs is different, but it would be under the authority of those governments to make changes to their legislation to determine how to treat this new benefit.
In terms of federal programs, we foresee that there could be some potential interactions, but that will really depend on the design of the benefit. If there are any consequential amendments that would need to be made to federal programs, they would be done through legislation and regulatory processes or policy. Again, it depends on each program. However, that's not necessarily the intention of this clause. It was intended to speak to issues of bankruptcy and insolvency so that the CDB would not be used as a way to pay outstanding debts.