Again, in both cases the intent of the definitional changes is to bring Canada into conformity with the international agreement in question.
The agreement has a fairly broad definition of fish and marine life, so we've tried to capture that in the amendments that are included in this bill. Likewise, the negotiators of the treaty were trying to ensure that there weren't loopholes, if you will, whereby somebody might be able to circumvent the provisions by having illegally caught fish arrive in a port in a vessel that didn't meet a definition of fishing vessel.
That's my understanding of the motivation behind the definitional changes there. They are broadened to include other kinds of vessels, and also to ensure that in any port of entry where illegally caught fish may be entering, the relevant authorities have the powers necessary to address the situation. As I understand it, the current legislation applies to fishing vessels and wharves, so that in situations where illegal, or suspected to be illegal, product is found in some other place such as a warehouse or what have you, enforcement officials have the necessary authorities to take the appropriate actions.
That's my understanding. Again, I will turn to Allan.