The implication would be, as the member has suggested, that in fact there would be no limit. There would be no requirement for operators to carry a tier of insurance. They could self-insure or use a provincial guarantee or other alternative financial security to address the required amount.
The reason we included the 50% limit was that we felt, first of all, that this was independent. This was a separate fund that could be called upon in the event of an incident and would be quite separate from the operators or quite separate from government. It would be a fund that would be concrete.
We also felt that insurers brought with them claims, administration capabilities, that perhaps an operator would have to go out and contract for. As well, we looked at the experience in other countries, where other countries all include a tier of insurance in their liability regime.
We introduced this flexibility to address the concerns of operators that we should provide some flexibility and have an alternative to insurance. We chose the 50% for the reasons I've indicated.
I should add that there is a further provision in the legislation that allows that amount to be changed by regulation. The 50% can be changed by regulation. It can be either increased or decreased.