Okay.
Substantively, amendment BQ‑13 aims to replace the presumption of confidentiality with the presumption of the public's right to know. So the idea is to tighten up the language of this subsection; otherwise we will regress, in our view. To do this, we will rely on what is happening elsewhere, in countries similar to ours.
The U.S. Toxic Substances Control Act requires that confidentiality claims for commercial information be accompanied by a justifying statement. This means that, if a person wants the information to remain confidential, they will have to explain why. It is the same in Europe: if a person wants to submit information they want to keep confidential, they must prove that its disclosure could harm their commercial interests.
By means of amendment BQ‑13, we want to put in place conditions on confidentiality. If a piece of information shouldn't be made public, the notifier must justify it. This could help avoid a situation where a substance is put on the market, analyzed and, some time later, discovered to be a carcinogen, which was not realized because the required information was not available.