Maybe I can try to answer that.
Normally that's the case, because possession absent a licence would otherwise be an offence in the case of, let's say, a firearm. If you look at the motions package or in the bill—and this is why this is an important question—nothing would make possession of a part without a licence an offence. That criminalization or, rather, the prohibition created in the code and then the permission that's granted in the Firearms Act via a licence that applies to firearms.... That system won't apply to parts, so what I think you'll see in some of the other motions is that the only requirement with respect to a licence for a firearm part is that the person who wishes to buy one be the holder of a valid licence. However, possession of the part itself is not touched by either this or anything else that is proposed.