Yes, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to point out that the meeting had to be shortened.
I will now speak to the proposed amendment.
Paragraph 24(2)(b) of the bill reads as follows:
reduce the amount of liability applicable to an operator of a nuclear installation, or operators of a class of nuclear installations, having regard to the nature of the installation and the nuclear material contained in it.
This in no way specifies the categories of nuclear installations that could benefit, so to speak, from a reduction of this kind. The wording of the sentence is very vague and anyone can benefit. I see that as a major problem.
If the government were in agreement, we could easily adopt my amendment and come up with something else that would specify the categories of installations. We would, of course, agree that educational institutions could benefit from a reduction of this kind.
If the government is open to that idea, we would have to correct this afterwards in order to make sure that only some categories of installations could benefit from a reduction of this kind. We must not leave this part of the paragraph as vague as it is at the moment. Specifically, it means that anyone could benefit from a reduction of this kind, which I see as a mistake.