Well, the only thing I can deduce from what I've heard is the notion that the powers—As Mr. Rochon said, it is unclear under what authority the environment minister can make the regulations that are called for in the bill. We've heard that there ought to be different statutory authorities referenced in the bill, as opposed to CEPA. We've just seen the interpretation section of this bill not pass, which means it's not the Minister of the Environment. Is that correct?
I'm at a point where I'm not sure how much further we can go without taking a break, which I would recommend, or getting further explanations. There are a number of other substantive changes that I'm seeing now. For example, in the bill, we're talking about a prohibition; in the amendment, we're talking about an order. I don't know if it's the same thing at all.