Okay. So I'll let it stand as it is and I'm going to read the explanation for why we have it here.
Now, of course we know about Bill C-52 last year and the problems we had with that. So now we have Bill C-30 here, and as many witnesses have come forward and told us, Bill C-30 as it sits is quite vague.
What they've always said is that service levels are very important, and they say they're not meaningful the way they are. Virtually every witness told us this: they want a clear, mandatory service-level contract with enforcement remedies that are reciprocal both ways. They don't want to be tied up in courts for 10 years. As we mentioned before, some of this stuff can be tied up quite a long time.
This amendment helps fix that problem. In the first part of proposed subsection 169.31(1)(1.2) we provide a definition of service obligations that all the shippers agreed upon last year. It's precise, it's practical, and it's to the point. These are the things that an arbitrator will need to cover in any of these contracts. When this thing starts rolling out, somebody has to be an arbitrator here, and they're going to have to have more defined rules and regulations.
In the second part, in proposed subsection 169.31(1)(1.3), we shine a clear statement of principle of how you can tell when an adequate performance has been provided, which is key.
And then in the final part, we make the point about reciprocal consequences. This needs to be clearly spelled out in any contract imposed by CTA arbitration. That's what proposed subsection 169.31(1)(1.4) does.
So, Mr. Chair and colleagues, this amendment was also.... The Minister of Agriculture from Saskatchewan recommended many of these here. We even have the Mining Association, the canola growers, The Fertilizer Institute, the western grain growers, I mean the list goes on of everybody who wants more defined rules.
They're not just rules everybody has to follow, it's how we enforce them, how we process people when they're wrong done by, and how people get paid at the end of the day.
So I think they're all here, and we went through this process last year. I think this is a great opportunity to have these amendments in here, and it would give everybody in the system a better idea and something to work with.