So when it comes down to it, in order to study economic loss, the government, through liability, has to set some sort of boundaries as to where those losses can be compensated for and where they can't. One thing we've established, at least in this section—and I hear your point about further psychological damage and the rest that is contained here. In section 15 it is contained around physical harm that then causes trauma.
The second recommendation that came out talked in terms of economic loss. The recommendation from, again, its own study said don't just look at Gentilly-2 and Darlington, because the population concentrations around those plants are not that great. It says here to consider Pickering, which has within its vicinity a much larger population. Did the government take this recommendation and go and look at a higher concentration of population around a plant like Pickering?