Thank you very much.
I will continue in the same vein as my colleague Mr. Williams. Obviously, we are introducing the concept of best practices, a rapidly evolving concept. According to a University of Toronto professor who appeared before us, some practices that were considered effective three or four years ago are no longer considered effective.
You are telling us that you are introducing a concept, not a definition, into the act. I get the impression that, at some point, if there is a lawsuit or if the rights of an individual or group are infringed, it will be up to the courts to interpret that concept. It introduces a lot of uncertainty.
Why did the concept not work in the best interests of the child at the time? You know we've discussed this. It's a concept. Now we are being told that this leads to uncertainty, that there is no definition, that the courts will have to get involved, that it is terrible for companies.
How is it that, with this concept here, all of a sudden it's okay and it doesn't introduce too much uncertainty? Is it because there is a kind of consensus and there is no uncertainty as to how companies will interpret this?