I think there would be a way to do that through specific amendments that may contemplate it. The problem is, as you've put it, you consume a bunch of alcohol and you get in a car, you're still absorbing that alcohol. When you get pulled over, you've yet to absorb enough to put you over the legal limit, but if that officer pulled you over 10 minutes later, you would have been over the legal limit.
This is obviously highly morally blameworthy behaviour, there is no question about that, and there certainly can be some limited amendments that might allow a court to consider that absorption rate, with the proper expert evidence, to say that if you had been over the limit within a certain time of driving, if you were caught driving.... Amendments of that nature and that limited scope may correct the problem.
What this bill does, unfortunately, is to eliminate this bolus drinking and sort of after-driving drinking defences problem, which is rare. I've consulted widely with people who do a lot of work in this area, and they are rare defences. But what the bill does to eliminate those rare defences is that it criminalizes, and will criminalize, people who have driven with no alcohol in their system—