Thank you for your question.
We are fundamentally opposed to interim orders and ministerial orders and directions to vessels as normal forms of governance. We see those types of instruments having the potential to be abused and to be used more frequently than they should be and to be used as a method to essentially circumvent the normal regulatory process for which there are extensive consultations and inputs from industry in order to get to the right place.
Yes, the minister needs the ability to act quickly if there is an emergency, but we haven't seen any situations in recent times in which there has been that great an emergency that an interim order or a ministerial order would have been appropriate, and yet that wording is being introduced in every piece of marine legislation. It was just brought into a piece of the Canada Shipping Act 2001 recently, and we were quite vocal about that section. Without that definition of exactly what it can be used for in what circumstances, it's just very broad and open to interpretation and has the potential to be—I won't say misused, but in situations where the other processes—