We're not saying that they should be indemnified. It could be just a drafting issue, but the legislation right now says that providers are not entitled to compensation. That's open to interpretation. Does that just mean they don't have a right at law of compensation, or does that mean they cannot be compensated?
What we're suggesting is that there should be discretion for the minister or the Governor in Council to award compensation on a case-by-case basis and that providers who are impacted by those orders should be able to make representations as to whether or why they should receive compensation.
For example, in the United States, the government set up a multi-billion dollar fund to help a certain class of providers remove Chinese-supplied equipment from their infrastructure.