So in that inference, then, would you see Justice McLachlin at a later date in the not-too-distant future saying again that prostitution is not illegal in Canada? As well, going back to what was probably the main phrase she voiced in her decision, which you quoted—sadly, not in its entirety because when you said that—
. . . the Charter does not mean that Parliament is precluded from imposing limits on where and how prostitution. . .
—which is what the legislator is trying to do with Bill C-36, you just didn't mention—
. . . as long as it does so in a way that does not infringe the constitutional rights of prostitutes.
So my question for you is, in that part of that decision, if the Supreme Court of Canada had to review Bill C-36, is it your understanding that what has been put in Bill C-36 by the Minister of Justice and his team is okay with that part of the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada?