Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to address this for the last time in the general comments section. This is following up on what I was talking about before. This is an issue that I've been dealing with the Minister on for a long time; the issue of having a post-secondary education student financial assistance for students with disabilities that is legislated.

Mr. Chairman, the $100,000 grant given to the Council for Disabled Persons for this purpose is not entirely correct. That money is used for various things, one of them being for helping students with disabilities. But the weakness with that method, Mr. Chairman, is the fact that it's highly temporary. It's a grant given to a non-government organization, and it could come and go at any time. It is not there for students with disabilities who have to go to all different places to try to get money to further their studies, whether it be for further education, or to get a job, or to learn life skills. I think we have to do better to look after those who we put through our school system under an inclusionary policy, and then we just drop them when they get out of high school. I really think that we can do better, Mr. Chairman.

I do believe strongly that this is really about equal treatment and equal protection under the law, and we're not providing that for the students with disabilities. We tell them you get out of high school, we'll put you through, but you're not protected under the law. You're on your own. You've finished Grade 12 and try to get a job or whatever, but you could get a grant here and a grant there, but that's just going to be a handout. I really believe that he had the opportunity to do the right thing when the Student Financial Assistance Appeal Board made a decision saying that this program should be included. I went and talked to him and I pleaded with him to do the right thing, and the letter that I received from him is highly questionable.

I don't want to malign anybody. I know that everybody in the department is working really hard. But in this case, I really believe that they failed to think outside of the box. In fact, the response from the Minister questions the decision of the appeal board. It's sort of not questioning, but sort of saying put a different spin on why they did what they did, when in fact the board decision is very clear. Based on the evidence, they have deemed this institution a post-secondary education, and that those students with disabilities should be able to get student financial assistance. Mr. Chairman, the Minister also has the aid of regulation. It's written very clearly in section 12 that we have the obligation to provide affirmative action programs for the remuneration of the conditions of those persons through post-secondary school education. The Student Financial Assistance Appeal Board read this to include various institutions to be a post-secondary education program.

I really think it's not fair, it's not right for us to say that those with disabilities line up in one line and that line could end any time because it's a temporary, non-government organizational program that could be given at any time or stopped at any time. It could be moved around at any time. Those students without disabilities take it for granted that they get out of high school, and if they lived here, they apply for student loan, they get it and go to school.

Another thing with maximizing northern employment, we did a great thing by creating a policy that says we are going to help you with your transition out of school, so you can get a job, start on a career, we want you in our government, we want you to participate in our economy, but those students with disabilities who need to go to school to get life skill training...In the example of the constituent I have been working with, he's in a program that's going to get him a job. He's in a program that's going to make him a full member of our economy and be a participant. At every turn, he's been reminded over and over again that he has a disability and he is not going to be entitled to the same treatment under the law, you are not equal under the law. You have to line up in a different line. This is not something he was told all through the school system. When he went through inclusive schooling, he went through school, he got help and he got there. I guess I could have written another letter to the Minister, but I just figured I was going to get another letter saying the same thing. I would plead with the Minister that he reviews this file, that he reads the letter that he sent to me dated December 17th again and recognize that that is not the right thing. We have a department dismissing a decision of the board and trying to change the decision to maintain the status quo. I really would urge the Minister to revisit that.

At the same time, I would like to get a commitment from the Minister to look at what might be the financial implications of setting up a clear policy, legislation or regulation within the department and not giving to an NGO or grant program, but creating something that is legislated so that it's permanent and something that is entrenched that would provide student financial assistance for students with disabilities. I don't mean students who need wheelchairs or hearing aids, but students with learning disabilities who may have to take alternative educational programs to make them a fully participating member of our economy and who need to go to a school like Fairview College in Alberta or some other programs. Knowing what we know of student populations and the information the department can gather about how many students are out there within our school systems or in various programs, what would be the cost implications and policy implications of entrenching this and following up on the board's decision? Thank you.