Thank you, Chair.
This speaks to a public interest intervenor mechanism looking at the Board of Arbitration. In our view, it's a balance of how one advocates on behalf of certain groups that perhaps don't have the resources to advocate on their own behalf. So we'd add subparagraph (viii). It would be amended to say the “criteria to fix public interest intervener costs and to tax final costs” by the Board of Arbitration and Review Tribunal “in connection with proceedings under this Act”.
There are folks out there who would want to be intervenors and can't afford to because they'd be taking on a very large corporation that has very deep pockets. Again, this is a litigation issue, so the issue is always money when it comes to litigation of some form or another. It's always about resources and how to find stuff.
Clearly, this is about trying to balance the playing field, so to speak. Yes, there's a cost involved, and I recognize that. The government doesn't like costs per se. I'm sure one of the reasons they'll vote against it is because of the cost. Other than that, it is about trying to level the playing field between the competing forces of one group defending its way and another group advocating on behalf of others.
I'll leave it at that, Chair.