Mr. Easter, you quite rightly described the city of Ottawa, but I'll offer a couple of observations.
This has an agricultural dimension to it. It has an energy dimension to it. It has a climate change dimension to it. It has an air quality dimension to it. And there's no shortage of debate, not just within Canada but around the world.
I can't give you the specific reasons for why we were not able to engage with Environment Canada officials as the NOI intended back in 2007, so that we could be ready for 2010. I can tell you, though, that we are busy with Environment Canada on air quality intentions and climate change intentions. They're a very busy department, and I'm not in a position to suggest which priorities officials should be working on there. I do know that they've been professional, just not as timely as we would have liked.
It is the responsibility of Environment Canada to develop the regulations, because the Canadian Environmental Protection Act is the enabling legislation under which regulations are going to be developed.
There's another element to regulatory design that is going to be needed, and that's in respect of section 147 of CEPA, which prescribes the circumstances under which waivers may be needed on a going-forward basis, as we frankly complicate the fuel supply system in this country. But I don't fault any particular department. I don't think it's because of a lack of interdepartmental cooperation. I think it's a function of a very heavy agenda at Environment Canada.