To reflect on the previous question, I want to underscore that AG consent can always be delegated down, as is done in some provinces, to what's called the director of public prosecutions.
To your second question, we're guided by intimidation case law, as it's been interpreted by the courts. It's a term used in the Criminal Code and entrenched in the Criminal Code.
You raise a really important point, Mr. MacGregor, which is the idea of ensuring that lawful dissent and protest, including labour work stoppages at an important piece of infrastructure, are protected and remain protected. That's why the language has been deliberately inserted into the bill. We don't want this to turn into a situation where ideology motivates whether people come under the penumbra of prosecution initiatives. It is always when there is an element of foreign interference and something is not proper lawful dissent and protest, but transfers into something more reprehensible that's trying to influence Canada and subvert Canadian interests.