I'm happy for Mr. Zoe to respond to that, but I think we should recognize that he comes here with a certain point of view. I think there are clearly other members of the aboriginal community who are involved in the union and would have a different point of view.
Mr. Zoe is certainly welcome to do that. Before he does respond, I'm just curious: if your assertion is correct and you really believe that you didn't use replacement workers and you don't intend to in the future, then what's the worry about this amendment? If this is not a practice you believe you've engaged in, then what's the problem with actually putting it into the labour code to make it clear that replacement workers should not be used?