Thank you, Madam Chair.
Since the beginning of this study, since this bill was first introduced, the views we have heard most have been from people from the department. Today, we have heard from three researchers, three professors in the field. What we have learned today is quite new. We have learned that it is possible to preserve the spirit of the bill and what it tries to do while still removing everything to do with Level 2. I have not heard you make a sufficiently strong case that, if Level 2 is removed, problems will be caused and that the spirit and the goals of the bill will not be preserved. I would like to hear your response to that subject, amongst others.
Professor Matlashewski told us that it would slow down research, delay breakthroughs, and prevent our researchers and our industry from being on the cutting edge of technology and meeting the needs of an industry that wants to set itself up here. I would like to hear your response. It is a problem if keeping Level 2 in the bill prevents us from doing our job properly.
There is another problem. I am sure that you are going to tell us that everything can be settled in the regulations. I would like to know if you are aware that you are asking us, as parliamentarians and a community of scientists working in laboratories, to leave everything to you.