I guess my question is why we need them. Let me frame it another way.
I presume that the two witnesses I'm speaking to here were either the principal drafters of the bill or the experts within the department on the bill. What was the legislative intent? What was the intent in adding those words given the existence of section 429. I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself, but was the intention to make the defence of lawful excuse tighter or broader, or did you have any intent in terms of the defence that already exists?