I think it's not so much of a question of interoperability in this case from a technological perspective, or from a rules-based perspective, but it does speak to an inconsistency that could be created such that mergers that do not meet the threshold of creating a substantial lessening or prevention of competition could continue to move through because they could not necessarily be challenged by the commissioner in front of the tribunal.
However, those that do reach that threshold of substantial lessening or prevention of competition are taken to tribunal and are then forced to be remediated to a point where they are bringing back the competition playing field to what is considered to be a zero change to the competition or concentration effects that would have prevailed otherwise.
What we're talking about here is a bit of an inconsistency potentially, whereby some mergers could move through without tripping that SLPC threshold, but those that do trip that threshold would then need to be remediated all the way back down to zero. That's where the inconsistencies hold.
I think Mr. Simard's point earlier as well is that there could be a scenario in which a firm or firms propose a merger that it is determined to trip the SLPC threshold, the commissioner takes the case forward, and then the parties simply withdraw that proposed merger and resubmit a merger that just skirts under the wire.
There are some potential logistical challenges in how this would operate in practice that we're proposing the committee consider.