Yes. Thank you for that question, and you're quite correct. We took those 38 elements of criminalization contained within the treaties, and if you examine them on a case-by-case basis, you will note that many of them are covered already by existing legislation, in particular by the Criminal Code. Things like theft, obviously, are already there.
We had a look at the four sections that I enumerated in my opening comments. In a sense, we grouped the kinds of activities together in four specific sections that deal directly with these types of activity and we addressed the penalties that go along with them as well. We made the distinction that it's not just theft if you're stealing this kind of material. The threat to society is of such import that the penalties are increased. It wasn't just a question of gathering up and making sure that all this activity was criminal; we wanted to make sure that the right penalties were in place, penalties that accord with the seriousness of this kind of activity.
We didn't want to have all kinds of duplication, Mr. Chair. It was unnecessary to have 38 new sections. That was not the case. As you can see, and your analysis will confirm it, they're grouped together. This is a cleaner and more precise approach, in my opinion.