Certainly. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I've said this before publicly, so I think it's fair to say it in front of this committee: we learned a lot through the road salts example. We learned a lot about how difficult it is for the public to understand the word “toxic” and how much upfront work you need to do to indicate what the intention is of adding a substance to the schedule. I was pleased that the witnesses did indicate that the risk management has gone better. That's what we've been trying to do more of, so that when we add something to the schedule we give more sense of where we are trying to go and what we are trying to do in terms of managing the risks.
That being said, though, I don't want the committee to feel there's no engagement or consultation during the risk assessment phase. There is expert peer review. There are discussions with experts and there's a peer review process. And then the purpose of publishing a Canada Gazette notice about the intent to add a substance to the schedule is to ensure there's formal engagement.
But that being said, I think we learned a lot about the process we went through with road salts.