That shows that agreement may be possible on ways of cooperating. Of course, there have been federal studies. However, I think cooperation is by far preferable to any federal law imposing rules of conduct on the provinces. Just between you and me, Ottawa is a long way from the municipalities and from Highway 175, in northern Quebec.
Mr. Bramley, you pointed out -- quite rightly -- that the Governor in Council added greenhouse gases to Schedule 1 of CEPA on November 22, 2005. Ms. Collins, you told us that you referred extensively to the LaForest judgment. However, you should also have said that some justices dissented with that Supreme Court judgment. Supreme Court justices -- and this is of some significance politically -- were not of one mind in terms of the kind of follow-up needed in relation to Canadian laws.
I'd like to hear your assessment of the impact of the November 22, 2005 federal government decision relating to transportation plans, for example. By adding greenhouse gases to Schedule 1 of CEPA, could the federal government turn around and tell some municipalities how to develop their plans or force them to adopt building codes it felt were more appropriate?
Of course, there would probably be fewer battles, but doesn't this open the door to constitutional battles?