It's pandemonium here. Thank you. I'm going to keep going.
Like Ms. Duncan, when I first took a look at this bill, I was very worried about this being a precedent. She has been very consistent about trying to get an answer about whether or not it will be a precedent. Thank you for clarifying that in your words here today.
Also, my understanding, when I read this legislation, is that this is an amendment to the offshore accord act. It is not an amendment to the National Parks Act . I perceive that as further evidence that there isn't a precedent here when it comes to Parks because it's not actually an amendment to the National Parks Act.
Am I interpreting that correctly?