That's why we wanted clarification with this clause. We heard some testimony that conflicts with what Mr. MacDonald is saying today. I understand our colleague's testimony, previously....
The worry with stakeholders is that Bill C-55 gives the minister the right to immediately designate an interim marine protected area, using the precautionary principle with the absence of scientific data at that point to not delay this. The concern of our stakeholders is that this would impact the coastal communities, the fishers, and you would freeze that interim protected area completely.
The intent of this section is to ensure that we have some clear language that gives stakeholders some assurances that they can continue fishing, supporting their families and communities.
That's the concern, Mr. MacDonald.
Am I misunderstanding what your comments are, right now? I think that is different from what we've heard previously.