I will restate what the bill does, for those watching, which is that it prohibits the seizure of equipment or anything that anyone who suffers from a disability has that may be subject to a judgment debtors provision of the District Court Act, if that is something that's needed by that person for their care, independence, participation in the community, or the support that they need in the healthcare system. That is to say that it's about upholding our fundamental rights. I say "our" because I think that I speak on this bill as someone who has a very real chance of being impacted by it later in life, because I do suffer from multiple sclerosis (MS), and that's a chronic illness that may, in future, mean that I need to access a wheelchair, a mobility support item, and other types of equipment or expensive measures that may otherwise have come under the legislation. When you're diagnosed with MS now, because the treatments have gone so far in the past decade or so—and I'm incredibly grateful for that—you do get told repeatedly, at every stage of that diagnosis process and once you start on the treatment, "Don't worry, this is a different kind of illness. We have different treatment for it now; you probably won't end up in a wheelchair." What I wish we said was that it's OK, even if you do, because we'll do everything we can as a society to make sure that you are, in fact, included, that your independence isn't affected, that your health will be taken care of, and you will be who you are still. 