I appreciate the intent of Mr. Bigras, but as the department has shared with us, the wording doesn't make sense as to what's been proposed. If we can get the wording that is satisfactory to Mr. Bigras, it would be helpful for us to move ahead in a logical way. If he's not happy with the friendly amendment as proposed by Mr. Jean, then I would ask that we do—
The purpose of this is to strengthen, and what we're hearing from the department is that it's not strengthening, it's causing confusion. We need to get the wording right before we move ahead. Could we have five minutes to work with Mr. Bigras and, I hope, get a wording that will achieve what he's asking, but also make sense?