I'll only comment as to the effect of what the amendment appears to accomplish or its impact on other provisions within the bill. Obviously, it's for the committee to decide if one approach versus the other is the better approach.
I was listening a moment ago when Member Housefather was describing his amendment and I didn't see anything inaccurate in how he described it. I think that's all I can say.
The other day, I was asked at the end of the last meeting to describe NDP-1, and I did. I just identified one potential issue, which is that it only makes exception to (3)(a) and not (3)(b), so there's just a question there as to what would happen with (3)(b).
That's all I would want to say on that.