I also wanted to reflect very briefly again on the changes to the verdict. Our chairperson, Ginny Andersen, stepped us through a number of those changes, and there were actually three iterations of change to what the current law is. I'd again point to the member's bill when it first came into select committee, and the verdict in that bill referenced "acts or omissions" and also included a reference to "the defendant". The select committee then shifted to "proven but insane", and where we landed—the "act proven, but not criminally responsible on account of insanity"—is actually, in my view, very akin to the member's initial proposal. That says two things to me. Firstly, it shows the integrity and the balance that the member brought to the initial version of the bill, which was intended to bring a balanced approach, but it also shows the rigour with which the committee approached its task. 