Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would indeed.
This is, I think, consistent with points made earlier in committee by members of committee, including Greg. It's the notion that in using a term, we shouldn't leave it to courts to define how it's going to be interpreted later.
PV-3 offers definitions that are quite widely accepted in the field for the terms “aggregate exposure” and “cumulative effect”. Given the time, I'm not going to go through describing the definitions—they speak for themselves—but they're straightforward and quite widely accepted, to provide background.
When the bill eventually needs interpretation, these definitions will be very helpful.