Thank you, Madam Chair.
To the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport, I think your requests are very reasonable. They would be good things to do, even outside the legislation—also within it—in terms of regulations and so forth. They may not be specifically here but should be accomplished and set as a goal. Thank you for your presentations and your commitment to these measures. It makes important strides for several reasons.
To Mr. Hawley, on the historical horse racing, it seems to me that the horse-racing industry is looking more for a revenue stream than really anything else.
I have a lot of empathy because the provincial government under McGuinty closed the Windsor raceway despite the fact that we introduced a charity casino, which actually made a profit and was doing okay. We lost all the subsequent benefits, as you mentioned.
I have empathy for you right now, jealousy even, with your being in Kentucky. It's actually a quicker drive from Windsor to Kentucky, where you are, than it is from Windsor to Ottawa.
I really have a lot of empathy, but I guess the problem is this: Would you not agree that historical racing is based on fiction and algorithms? That makes it a little bit different. You could do the same thing with historical betting on hockey, football, anything.
Perhaps that might need some more thought, and provincial regulations could offer a better path. Would you not agree that might be better? If not, what is a specific amendment that you want for C-218?
My understanding is that it would require several...and perhaps even different legislation that could actually scuttle this one. Maybe you can comment on that, please.