Mr. Chairman, in spite of that conflict you've proposed, in the unlikely event that this or the next one passes, I want to indicate my support for this amendment. It's my view and my party's view that the present section in the bill would create significant regulatory and administrative burdens for libraries.
By the way, I'm going to try to help the interpreters by speaking as slowly as I can. I normally speak at about 200 words a minute, with gusts up to 400, so I'll do my best to keep that under control.
The present provision forces you to make a mechanical copy, so it would not in fact be technologically neutral, which is something that otherwise the bill is trying to achieve, I think. The fact is you can still have one copy, but it has to be a paper copy. That makes no sense to me in this digital age.
Also, this five-day rule does not conform to any research schedule, and it would primarily be researchers who would be affected by these provisions.
It seems to me that amending this as proposed would make it better for innovation in Canada.