Guyanne is distributing some examples of wording used in some other legislation to deal with this particular issue, which was raised by the shipping industry. These are just a selection from four different acts of ways that it's been dealt with. As you'll see in most of them, they specifically address the international law with which we're concerned there may be a conflict, as opposed to wording it in general terms. The Oceans Act is one exception where they do apply it generally. They say “subject to Canada's international obligations”. In that case, the law would have to be interpreted and applied in light of those international obligations.
Maybe I should refresh everybody's memory of what this is all about. The shipping industry was concerned that the civil action provisions of this bill could potentially conflict with an international convention that we've implemented in domestic law through the Marine Liability Act. Mr. Scarpaleggia's amendment was intended to ensure that doesn't happen, but there were some concerns about the wording. These are a few examples of how that's been dealt with.