I think that's very helpful, actually. Giving the comparison of 50,000 litres to the average flow of an international river, I think, is very helpful.
On that basis, and given that we all agree that the purpose of this legislation is to protect from environmental harm, we don't want there to be any kind of a challenge. I think the provisions of the bill have to be consistent with the concept of environmental harm.
I would urge the members of the committee to vote against this amendment.