Mr. Speaker, I would acknowledge the amendment that was made. We pushed and worked with the government over months, even years, I could add, because there was the first iteration from the Senate bill, and then this one. The Conservatives were stubbornly refusing to make any amendments at all, so I acknowledge that one amendment, that one word, but it is not enough. I will just cite the one part of the clause that is still here.
It says the following:
Section 6 does not prohibit a person who is subject to the Code of Service Discipline under any of paragraphs...
Then it refers to the National Defence Act. It continues:
...or combined military operations involving Canada and a state that is not a party to the Convention, from....
Then it talks about directing or authorizing an activity that may involve the use or acquisition of cluster munitions.
Therefore it is not up to the standard that we accepted for ourselves before.
Finally, before I give it to my colleague to answer, clause 11 still has problems on interoperability that could be undermining our adherence to the treaty. That is what we have to look at: whether there is a scenario in which we could be undermining adherence to the treaty. That is the problem. I would say that the member would know that it would be clear working with our allies that our obligation to adhere to a treaty, as to our own legislation, could be worked out with our allies to let them know that we must not be in theatre in any way, shape, or form—