Yes, that's the one. Basically, if I'm reading it correctly, we're talking about the implementation of everything.
I'm sorry. To summarize, I think what the NDP and Mr. Viersen are trying to do is just address the point that a treaty could potentially involve land. They're trying to address the concerns that we heard through testimony. That's what I'm trying to say. I think this might be a legitimate point to actually look at in order to satisfy those who are pushing back with opposing views, so that we could potentially get to a point where everyone is satisfied and comfortable with this.
That is just a comment.