On the last point, Victoria Day is not a statutory holiday in four provinces, even though in federal law it's called a “legal holiday”. There can be differences. That's exactly the point. This can change only the federal statute. My understanding is that this has no impact on collective agreements, collective rights, and that it's not a legal issue with regard to changing the language. This is simply adding consistency to the language, which is why I suggest that it may be correct to argue that it's a symbolic change, but it's already in the act, right?
Remembrance Day, let's not forget, is already in the Holidays Act. This is about adding the word “legal”. Many people say that it was an oversight in the original drafting of the bill and that it should have been in the Holidays Act to begin with, so we're just correcting a past error. As to whether somebody can use that as a bargaining chip at some future negotiation, I suppose that's possible, but I don't think that should deter us from doing the right thing.