It's similar to the response I gave before, on which Mr. Clarkson corrected me. My understanding is under section 93 the government can decide that something should be banned, and if they do decide that, it will be banned. I thought they were able to put that on schedule 1. Maybe it goes on a different schedule. If there is a need to do that for a substance after a risk assessment, fair enough. The industry involved may provide information saying they are not all that keen on it, but the government will ultimately make a decision, and then we will have to find a substitute. The substance in question would have been banned or limited, whatever the limitations were.
That's similar to the Stockholm Convention. Annex A is for things that are going to be completely banned, with no more use at all. Then under annex B there is room for banning in some areas but restricting in others. I think we have the powers to do that under section 93 right now. The pollution prevention powers that are separate allow the government, before they develop regulations, to direct industry to the effect that this is something they would like them to look at and respond to, as far as what they can do on it goes, to see what industry can do on its own. If industry doesn't do a good job, then the threat--I guess that's the right term--is that they will come back with the regulation under section 93.