Okay. I'm not at that point of wanting to challenge the chair, but I guess I would ask committee members to understand what in effect we're doing, then. I know of no other place in Canadian text or law that you can do this: that you can give exclusive liability over one source or another and just exempt everybody else who happened to be involved because they're not written into an act in Parliament. That's a little odd. It creates an environment that I'm concerned about, in which a contractor says, “I'll never be liable”. A parts manufacturer will never be liable under this act.
I don't know if committee members or the witnesses can explain that. I understand the ruling in terms of the principle of the act, but what a strange precedent it is to create under law and to exclude a whole bunch of people who in the end might be the ones proven to be the cause of the accident, if you follow me.