My last question comes back to the article. I read the article, and I've read it a couple of times in the course of our study. It seems to me that anyone who would have paid attention to a lot of the comments that were made by the government regarding the protection of vulnerable people could have inferred that those exclusions would be somewhere in the bill, especially if you consider the experience of the Quebec National Assembly, in that those exclusions are in the Quebec bill as well on assistance in dying.
Would it not be possible that this could have been an educated guess as well, that protection of the vulnerable would necessarily include or could include those elements that we see in the article? I would like to have your take on that.