General, earlier you explained at length the difference between your appeal to the Supreme Court and the bill before us today. The latter concerns an urgent matter. That moreover was quickly demonstrated to us. We agree that there are various degrees of urgency and that the Trépanier decision requires more specific applications of the National Defence Act. I also agree that you have provided more clarity, certainty and stability.
As regards the Supreme Court, I didn't understand why a bill was being tabled and why these steps were being taken with the Supreme Court. You said that the Trépanier decision raised constitutional issues.
What constitutional issues has the Trépanier decision raised?