My memory is faulty, but I believe that in the last meeting the place we arrived at had to do with the fact that Mr. Angus offered the question: Were there powers to fine for activities that were apart from operating without a licence? I think the logic in that discussion was that the removal of a licence is very severe, and we wanted the ability to offer a fine to someone who was operating in a fashion that was not consistent with their licence but that didn't require the removal of the licence. Isn't that where we were the last time?
And I think we were told that we thought that the power existed--and you're confirming it today--that in fact you don't have to remove a licence to be able to fine somebody. I think that was the crux of the discussion the last time we had it.