Yes, absolutely. The way that my bill was written, at least in the portion that talked about the EI reform, it would involve a doctor's consent that the work was hazardous. Now I'm recommending to the committee that that section be removed, that de facto that part of the bill be gone. But this doesn't mean it shouldn't be a part of the discussion held on strategy part. It's about how do you determine what hazardous work, employment, is? And it needs to be robust. I don't think you want it to be something that could easily be taken advantage of, so there have to be some measures in there to properly measure what the conditions of the workplace are.
To give you some examples, an X-ray technician could be included, and police officer could as well. It's not just the trades; there are many other examples. Despite the fact that one of your colleagues today has indicated that 50% of the labour force are women, if you look at trades specifically, or if you look at police, or you look at firefighters, you will see that women are still grossly under-represented in terms of gender equality.