Let me clarify. The amendment made in 2001 covering the adventure tourism category in fact imposed compulsory insurance on passengers of $350,000 per person, in case of an incident. What has happened is that the industry cannot find insurance, so they have a hard time maintaining their business.
We could not, at that time, impose the compulsory insurance provisions that we would like to impose on big commercial activities, such as Marine Atlantic or BC Ferries. By clarifying the situation of adventure tourism, we are able to move to impose the compensatory regime for passengers on commercial entities. That's what we're trying to do, because since 2001 we've seen that the problem of adventure tourism is also creating a problem for our capacity to impose compulsory passenger liability on true passengers.
I just wanted to clarify that.