I guess where my questioning is leading is just to understand that when numbers are brought forward, there's a propensity in government to want to overextend the significance of any announcement. There was some action that the law required, and that happened.
There are certain chemicals that, while significant in their danger, are not significant in their presence within society. They just aren't in common usage. They existed 20 years ago, or they're in very small amounts. I see Ms. Tilman is nodding and Mr. Lloyd as well. I don't want to delve too much into Friday's announcement because we're still digesting it.
On your quotes around Mr. Laforest and the question of toxic, can you remind the committee again who he is?