Thank you, Mr. Chair.
From the outset, I have been missing something here.
First, there are environmental concerns. We heard the governor of Michigan say that some supports exceeded the 75-foot requirement, that the pipe wall was not thick enough, and that, in her view, Enbridge wasn't meeting all sorts of conditions. Enbridge responded that everything was fine.
Why has this not been resolved?
I'm missing something here. It's not up for debate. This is about science, not opinions.
Have certain conditions not been met, yes or no? This should not be up for debate, it should have been cleared up.
How is it that the issue has not yet been resolved?
How can there be a legal dispute over matters of fact and science?