In a previous response, you said there was a potential that, if we don't eliminate the section, there would be future lost Canadians. We would create another group of lost Canadians.
I've done this before on other sections. Can you give me an example of what you mean? It's a lot easier for us to work with examples. You were really good on the previous amendment, where I actually grasped the implications of what we were going to do once it was three times amended on the subclauses. Can you give an example of whom we're talking about when there's a potential for future lost Canadians?