Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to ask a question of my learned colleague opposite, who challenged the ruling of the chair. I'll wait for Ms. Karetak-Lindell.
You mentioned how you feel there should be some preferential treatment and you challenged the ruling of the chair that this was beyond the scope of the bill, but you admitted in your comments that you believe this is a bit beyond the bill's scope. So you agree this is beyond the scope of the bill, but you believe it should be included within the bill anyway? Is that what your point is, Nancy?
I'm just trying to get some clarification on this.