Kaylie, I'm going to jump in.
I also want to say, in case I wasn't clear on this, that I'm not trained as a lawyer, so I'm happy to defer to others overall. However, in terms of why we have AMPs, first, fundamentally, it's as a deterrent. Second, it's so that firms can be penalized proportionally to what's happening. Again, if this is a novel design in terms of the 3%—I think we've heard questions about whether it should be Canadian revenues versus international revenues—it's worth ironing out.
We could see an additional change or amendment through this future consultation, but I think it's important. I'd love to make a graph for you of our AMPs in Canada and benchmark them against our international peers, and then we can have another conversation about what our reputation means in that regard.
Kaylie, I'll turn it to you if you have something to add.