Canadian Heritage committee  Just to correct the record, I said earlier that one out of 1,000 people use sign language. It's actually one out of 100 people who use sign language. I just want to clear that up. To answer your question, depending on individual cases, there should be that flexibility to increase it to $100,000 to ensure that the support is there, but they would have to be significantly important cases.

Canadian Heritage committee  Well, the structure of CCP could be changed in the way the board selects their applicants and how the panel selects those, maybe with professors from law school. Maybe a change in that structure would be a way to improve that. We don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, certainly not.

Canadian Heritage committee  As I said before, the program was open to anybody who would be able to use it. If a free and willing group would need to use it, they could go ahead and use that program. It was very democratic, to answer your question.

Canadian Heritage committee  I'm very happy to answer that question. What happened on August 22 of this year was the Canadian Association of the Deaf had the result of that case published on the front page of The Globe and Mail. Also, the same day we had an e-mail from a client, a woman who was deaf. She didn't know about the news story, but she told me in her e-mail that her husband wanted an interview with Immigration Canada.

Canadian Heritage committee  I don't have anything really to add, except that the deaf community is a minority group. One out of 1,000 people in Canada use sign language. It's a very small group. So you are correct in saying they are a minority.

Canadian Heritage committee  My comment is that when deaf people have more access to programs they are more productive. Therefore, they pay more taxes towards the government and contribute more to the Canadian economy. That's from my perception. The court challenges program is dependent on who uses the program.

Canadian Heritage committee  Well, the government doesn't give money to non-profit organizations for political purposes, so when you go to court it's for a political purpose. Therefore, the government says that you cannot use their money. Their moneys would be used only to administer that program. So in that sense, we're stuck, and we don't really have a lot of options or choices when we do want to litigate something.

Canadian Heritage committee  There was a similar situation. The cuts were made before the deaf community was made aware.

Canadian Heritage committee  Yes, that's correct. Did you want me to present now?

Canadian Heritage committee  Good afternoon. I represent the Canadian Association of the Deaf, having acted for it in its successful case against the Government of Canada, whereby we won the right to have sign language interpreters when accessing government. This case was in the media all across the country.