One issue that I find here around the debate is that first of all, I don't see disability as a health issue. Disability is a social issue, a political issue, an economic issue. This is one of the concerns I have around the excessive demand clause. For me, the person that I'm working with right now is trying to support his family coming here. His brother has cerebral palsy. I've been working in this field for 40 years. I've been working with a number of people with disabilities, and I still do: people who are blind, people who have cerebral palsy, spinal injuries, etc. If you're thinking about who it is, I would say not to do that, I would say, as a minority representation and the significance of people with disabilities. Sometimes I don't use that term. I think I come from a position of disability pride. I keep wanting you to think about the changes in definitions around disability, the social construct of disability, that we as a society disable people with impairments.
We talk about costs. Similar debates, I'm sure, had to do with new immigrants when they were coming here after World War II or years ago: what about the cost to train these people to speak English, to learn English, and so on and so forth; what will happen to our society? Well, what's happened is that we have a wonderful society. I want to shift that to the concept of investment. As we were saying, it's not a heck of a lot more money, so it'll shift.
Some of the cases right now are small issues. Some of them have to do, for example, with Down's syndrome—like with one person I know, Nico Montoya. There's a family in western Canada that is facing deportation whose daughter has what I would refer to as minor impairments. The Chapman family, who wanted to immigrate, sold everything they had to come to Nova Scotia from England.