I'll make three points. Somebody referred to the dirty dozen. There were 12 substances for which I think the departments pioneered in the concept of virtual elimination. They were acted on under the toxic substances management policy of 1995. Some actions were taken under CEPA, some actions were taken by provinces, and there were other types of actions.
Most of them were pesticides. For those, we were satisfied that there would be no additional benefit from putting them on the virtual elimination list, and it would also create an obligation, if they were on the list, to prescribe the release limits that you've heard and the limit of quantification. We believed there was no benefit to be added by that work. In other words, the releases were all being managed. To add them to the list and create those burdens of doing the limit of quantification and the release limit would not achieve any environmental protection or human health protection.
The third point to make is that there is the issue of a problem with the limit of quantification concept when the substance is actually a contaminant in products. I think you heard PollutionWatch and the Chemical Producers' Association raise that point. That's an additional challenge that the departments have been struggling with. When the substance is a contaminant in product, the whole concept laid out in the regime in the act for the limit of quantification and the release limit just doesn't appear to make a lot of good sense.
In other words, we would use a section 93 regulation, under the powers of the Governor in Council, to add it to the prohibition list, and that would be a stronger tool than the release limit and a more necessary tool to protect human health and the environment.