Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate Mr. Rankin's comments, and the amendments, although I'm not inclined to support them for a couple of reasons.
First—and I'm going to ask the officials a clarification question, too—when it comes to proposed section 30.1 and “shall”, I think it's better to leave “may” in there because we do have the minister, which is the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, under this clause, and now we're adding the Minister of Employment and Social Development, who will be making regulations with respect to that list, the notification provisions and that kind of thing, and the rules around that. So to say “shall” under the enabling legislation is, I think, strong. I'd like feedback from the officials on this.
With respect to the second amendment, I believe it's incumbent on the minister to inform the employer when they will be put on this list, but I would be very reluctant to start segregating groups within the employer, whether it be trade unions, professional associations, accountants, lawyers—whatever it happens to be in that organization. I would suggest to you that the employer is enough. I wouldn't segregate any trade union or any other group within the company.
Do the officials agree that “shall” would be a strong way to start this one, when in fact, we're going to be having enabling regulations to specify what the publishing criteria will be?