My answer to the question would be that this is going to allow Canadians to put on a pair of glasses through which they can see how myriad federal statutes are going to be applied, because there's going to be an assumption that this is the baseline. The baseline is that public participation is guaranteed, that information is going to be provided, and that the public is going to have access to the processes involved in implementing various federal statutes.
So to the extent that there are gaps in federal statutes not allowing participation or not providing information, or where registries aren't available, this bill of rights is going to serve as a lifting up. It's going to serve as a baseline, if you will.
The interpretation, at least from our Ecojustice perspective, is that the ideal would be for this law to allow--and I believe it's drafted in such a manner that it would allow--federal laws to be interpreted with a view to its provisions. So the application of the Fisheries Act or of the Species at Risk Act would be impacted, and the ministerial discretion that is available pursuant to those acts would be impacted by the provisions of the Environmental Bill of Rights. That is, if there is going to be significant harm to the environment pursuant to a discretionary decision, then there is going to be an opportunity for citizens to try to force the government to take a second look at the situation.