That's fine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm going way back in the conversation to when we started.
Mr. Chair, you suggested we could ask other colleagues on the panel questions. If they choose to respond that's up to them.
Ms. Dabrusin, you were expressing concern about financial contributions that would go to cultural groups. I think this amendment established a base. I'm not an accountant; I'm absolutely not. That's the last thing I am.
I am wondering if you believe this created a loss of revenue for the cultural groups. I just thought a base, just in the sense of one level or another like the Australian model, had some validity to it in the sense of numbers and money. I know the G7 came to some kind of a tax thing on the weekend, and already somebody was pointing out the loopholes via which Amazon might get around that. We may face that with this as well.
Is it your belief that this type of amendment was built around trying to get around the revenue from the major technology companies we've talked about many times? Is your concern that there's a loss of revenue here with this type of amendment?