Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. The way I interpret this when I look at 27(2), it states that the medical advisor to the worker, sorry, the medical advisor, is to seek the opinion of another medical professional. So I take this to mean where they can agree on a third medical practitioner who they concur is an expert. The two of them choose that medical professional. Presumably if there is a disagreement as to who would be a third medical professional, they would rely on the policy in 4(a) and seek some mechanism to determine who it would be. In the first instance, if they are able to agree in the instance, maybe -- maybe the person has a skin condition and they think it's caused by chemicals at work and the two doctors agree on a third doctor who is a dermatologist -- that would be acceptable. That would be the first step to be taken to see if they can agree. Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.