Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to raise one comment Mr. Bittle made. I think this amendment is actually detrimental to what Mrs. Thomas seeks to achieve.
Basically, the argument here is that there is no violation of the Copyright Act, the Berne Convention or anything else. Saying “section 24 does not limit the right of quotation” implies section 24 is intended to limit other sections of the Copyright Act, because you're only carving out one exception.
I would like to ask Mr. Ripley whether that is a possible interpretation. By saying that section 24 explicitly does not do this, might it then imply it's intended to do things it was never intended to do?