This is the second part of the question around recourse. I'm trying to understand. The exclusivity of what we've offered up to nuclear industry is in effect a reaction to the fact that the burden of proof is not the same as it would normally be--you mentioned this just a few minutes ago--to prevent individuals from having to prove the direct damage caused.
There's a concern I would have if I were a nuclear operator and there's an accident and everybody and their dog claims damages and there's class action and it's large, and cities and provinces come on board. What is the level of burden of proof imagined in this bill, or is it under the CNSC as well, where it's at court, or it's under these courts that are set up once an accident happens?