This proposes new language and new paragraphs. What we're trying to do with this amendment is to protect against any arbitrary or bad-faith action by the minister, for example, limiting an exemption to a very short time. We have seen that. We had a one-year exemption just renewed for InSite, which will force it to reapply yet again within one year.
This amendment would also protect against a site being shut down on some really innocuous or flimsy pretext without some some sort of due process and an opportunity to correct any minor problems that have arisen. In any operation there are issues that arise. So we're trying to protect against a site being shut down just because something did go wrong. Maybe it could have been corrected; maybe something was learned from it.
It would also effectively get rid of the requirement for applications to renew an exemption, because we think that once an application has been approved, it's there and should be able to continue.
That's the effect of this rather long amendment.