The question that was passed over was on the policy initiative, so again, it's the exclusivity. I'm getting to this point. I understand now that we've had a ruling and the bill is seen to be an exclusivity liability bill, but I don't understand just in a common sense kind of way. If somebody sells a faulty part to a nuclear operator, and that causes an accident, the nuclear operator is not able to seek compensation or damages from the supplier. It seems counterintuitive.
