This was a concern raised by Madam Brunelle and some of the witnesses as well.
Under the law right now in this proposed bill, locations with one reactor are treated exactly the same as locations with many reactors. That's an unusual part of the Canadian design; you can have many reactors at one site.
As we try to understand liability and risk, we know that the more reactors, the more moving parts, the greater the risk. What we're trying to do in NDP-10 is identify that it's disproportionate and actually unfair to those who have only one reactor on site, because they have to run the same liability regime as those who are running many reactors on the same site. That doesn't seem to make intuitive sense, and it certainly doesn't make any sense on a risk factor.
It's like paying the same amount for car insurance if you own one car versus ten and you drive all ten of them. Obviously, the risk is higher if there are more cars out on the road, and your insurance would be higher as well. The chance of something happening over ten is greater than it is over one. It's a statistical fact.
That's all NDP-10 seeks to do.