My question was why should we complicate the current situation by two experimental states on this issue, which is a fantasy. It's not based upon any reality whatsoever. It's a mixture of things. It's a concoction of several things that took place in the past. It's an interpretation of those metrics and then put on a slot machine, versus what you're asking for, which I think is very reasonable in terms of the amendment that was made from the government legislation, which is very real.
It would seem to be that this is a stretch for the current law right now to experiment...this entire process. It would seem that it's only being done as a way to compensate for revenue from an industry that's struggling for a variety of reasons. This is very important and.... I support supporting this industry for many reasons, but it's not happening right now. I don't even know if historical gaming on horses or any other type of thing is taking place in the black market, the illegal market or the organized crime market. It seems to me that this is a stretch to include for a problem that's outside of this, whereas the first part of it is actually a value-added amendment that actually helps the industry. Also, what you're asking through historical can also eventually, once researched properly, be done provincially anyways.