Mr. Laforest, let me simply clarify. I didn't say the bill was based on ideology—I don't think it is. I think the bill is based on the very best possible intentions, which is to ensure that we adhere to high standards in our activities around the world. My concern is that people whose activities are based on ideology, who are inherently opposed to the extractive industries in principle or to the operations of Canadian companies abroad, and whose approach is essentially ideological could use the mechanisms contained in the bill to damage the Canadian interest and damage the interests of the peoples and the communities where those companies are operating. That's my concern.
The bill builds into it, through these mechanisms, an incentive for people. There are no penalties for somebody who recklessly damages the reputation of a Canadian company. There are very strong incentives for our competitors internationally to do what they can to undermine the competitive position of Canadian companies operating abroad, and this mechanism contained in the bill delivers to them a tool that can be used to recklessly damage the reputation of Canadian companies. That's where our concern was, not, certainly, with the philosophy underlying the bill or the desire that we know the bill's author has to see the highest possible standards followed.