It seems this is also a “may” clause: you may or may not.... So the point my colleague made, I think, is very valid. In some cases, this may be an evacuation where people's lives are completely upset and the minister would require more latitude in his ability to deal with the situation. So we're limiting the minister's authority here to deal with the situation. By increasing the amount, we're giving him more latitude, and to my mind, that's not a bad thing; it's a good thing.
Ministers of this government have responsibility for very large budgets and they deal with them in accordance with the good principles we have. In this case, he would have the ability to make those decisions. I don't see why fettering his ability to release dollars is a good idea; I don't see that at all. I see it in terms of ensuring that, in the end, other claims have an opportunity to come forward, which is quite correct, because the compensation that would come out of a nuclear accident would be ongoing for quite a while. So we do have to have some sense of that as well.
So I'm saying 40% would give the minister more ability to deal with the issues that may come up.