If I understand the question correctly—and I might not fully understand what the member who introduced the amendment intended—we do not read this as saying that it could prevent anything. It would direct other programs and their legislative frameworks. For example, if there was an interaction with another federal program, such as the old age security program, that program would require an amendment to its legislative framework that would exempt this benefit if it's not included in the calculation of income for that program.
In terms of what it is trying to do, the intention is to ensure that if the individual is in a bankruptcy situation or has debts against another program, benefits are not being clawed back again. Because it is a poverty measure, we're trying to protect the individuals who receive it. It is similar to the Canada child benefit in that regard.