I would just say, with respect to Ms. May's comments about the constitutional concerns, that this certainly hasn't stopped this government on any other piece of legislation. I've heard that concern as well. We'll see how that plays out.
I am curious, though. This is a concern that I've heard as well, given the conditions that the herd in some cases is in close proximity to and certainly within one nautical mile of where people are living. I'm wondering, in terms of the concerns Ms. May just mentioned and that I've heard as well, what prohibits people who in the normal course of their activities are within one nautical mile just because the herd has moved closer to them, rather than otherwise.... What prevents them from being interfered with in their normal course of living, or perhaps apprehended or moved away or whatever? I wonder if the parliamentary secretary could give me some understanding of what happens in that case.
I think that's what the amendment goes to. If we don't agree on the amendment, then what's to stop people in their normal course of going outside their door, walking to the store or whatever, from getting apprehended or charged, or pushed away and told they can't go to the store because they're within one nautical mile?
I wonder if the parliamentary secretary could give us some idea of how that would be dealt with.