Environment committee  I'll respond to the first part of your question, and then I'll pass it on to my colleague, who might wish to add more detail. With respect to the first question, on whether the language of the current text would have excluded consultation with the insurance industry, I think that's a no.

Environment committee  Definitely. By including the insurance industry as one of the listed parties with whom the minister must consult in developing this strategy, the minister would have to consult with the insurance industry.

Environment committee  As I understand it, the two amendments are being combined and the insurance industry is being included in the amendment that had been previously proposed. If that is how I understand it, it makes sense to us.

Environment committee  Thank you for the question. As the member noted, royal recommendation would be required for any new spending. This motion, as I understand it, is really just providing a “for greater certainty” provision, but it hasn't been added to other bills similar to this one, as you've noted, so it isn't strictly necessary from the perspective of ensuring that there is no spending associated with a private member's bill.