First, let's be very clear. Most of the specific tools that governments have are tools that are in the provincial domain. We have a few federally, but most of it is in the provincial domain in terms of government.
In terms of employers, and this is really quite important, we have collectively in Canada, and I think it's true virtually in every province, not put as much emphasis on continuing upgrading and provision of skills to the labour force as we should have. We relied heavily in the past on immigration in a way that we will not be able to rely to the same extent in the future. And certainly in what you might call the skilled trades, whether industrial or construction, we have a labour force that is now relatively old, and I don't think one can ask people engaged in some of that very heavy work to extend their working lives to 70 in the way some of us are privileged to be able to do.
There's an obligation, not only on governments but on employers as well, to work very hard at this. It's something that is an age-old problem, and we recognize it when labour markets get tight. Then we somehow collectively have amnesia when the economy gets a little softer.
So one of the most important questions is, how can we operate through the rather softer periods, which is precisely the time when the real cost to the economy of doing the training is the lowest? That is what we need to sit down and agree on now, at a time when everybody's sensitivity to this issue is heightened, and not wait until we have some slowdown and people say it's all taken care of.
I think there is a responsibility on the industry committee as well as on the social policy committees here, because this is absolutely crucial for the future health of Canadian industry, whether it be the manufacturing sector, the resource sector, or the service sector.