That's right, and in the role they play. For example, RCMP officials and RCMP officers, etc., are embedded in communities and families and some of them are coaches in communities where they coach kids' hockey teams. They're a part of the community, but you have access to them in the sense that they are employees of the government. That's what I mean by what the government can do. You can mandate certain things for federal employees, if you follow my line of reasoning here.
Obviously the federal government can do other things. When you say “a national action plan”, I'm assuming you're talking about federal legislation of some kind. Again, I don't know all the intricacies of the relationship between the federal and provincial governments in Canada. I really don't know those kinds of details but the federal government can set a tone, certainly, and can perhaps help to fund provincial efforts. I don't know, perhaps not, but I think there is a lot that government can do.
May I just give you one micro example? You might be able to figure out how this would work on a broader scale. At a city level—not the federal level but the city level—a mayor or the city manager, the chief executive of a city, has a huge workforce that he or she oversees. That workforce includes everybody from the senior-level politicians to the truck drivers and everybody in between. If you take a given city, the number of employees in that city could be tens of thousands in a big city and certainly thousands in other smaller cities. Those people have enormous contact, exponentially, with thousands and thousands of other people. What about everybody being trained in all of this?
When I say “trained”, I mean trained in understanding how they can use whatever position of influence they're in to interrupt and challenge abusive behaviours, get help for people, get resources for both perpetrators and victims, and help to create the message that abusive behaviour is not accepted, etc.