Sure, I would like to.
We would favour more of a regulatory approach. We think that brings certainty, and it levels the playing field. One of the goals of enforcement in all of the policy manuals of Environment Canada is that enforcement is carried out in a fair, consistent, and predictable manner. We believe the regulatory approach will do that.
The one I'm most familiar with is of course the Fisheries Act. We have the pulp and paper effluent regulations, and we have a complaint before the CEC on those now, but at least those regulations are there. You can go in and see whether they're being enforced. There's something measurable that helps the enforcement people. They're not dealing with some airy-fairy ideas about what's voluntary and what is not. So I think it is useful and I think we have gone perhaps a little further the other direction.
Of course, on the ground, one of the problems is that often those responsible for enforcement see the people they're enforcing against as their clients, so they end up getting a little closer than they would otherwise, and so the tendency is to move to voluntary programs.
Again, we've made two suggestions that we think will help bring the laggards up to speed and level the playing field for the good performers.