It is a difficult one. I understand the intention of what Mr. Warawa is suggesting.
I do share some concerns with Mr. Godfrey in terms of basic participation. For many of us, this would be five committee meetings a week over the next little while, along with the other files we have to deal with.
It almost feels a bit out of order in a sense, because my interest in getting to the Bill C-288 action plan would determine what we're able to do. I made suggestions that there be some interspersing of CEPA within our work plan so as not to allow a loss of momentum with that study. There are a number of groups we deal with in business and environment who are worried.
The problem, though, as Mr. Godfrey pointed out...Bill C-50, in a sense, is almost entirely a CEPA review; it is a change to CEPA to allow certain outcomes. The CEPA review process feels almost academic compared to what the government has suggested in their Clean Air Act. That has concrete suggestions, producing concrete results, which can be debated, as opposed to just any general recommendations.
I also feel we are near the end of our CEPA review. I am not sure how much more we have and how much more we need. That will be something the clerk or the chair might be able to clarify.