If I could, I'll respond to that.
I think you have to look at this in terms of the way the legislation divides things up. There are the so-called new chemicals, which are ones that have come about since the new chemical notification requirements came into place in the late eighties. Under those requirements, industry has to provide information to the government for making the assessment, and it's information that the government determines is necessary for assessing whether the substance is safe. So that's almost a reverse onus. It's not quite a reverse onus, because it's not industry proving it's safe, it's the government making that determination.
Now, would it be better that industry made the determination, or government? I think the public probably will have greater confidence in the government making a determination that the substance is safe, based on the data, than in industry making that determination. And I believe that's really why it doesn't go all the way in terms of reverse onus. But we are required to give the government the information it needs to make that decision, and if we don't give it enough, it can ask for more.
So that's the regime for so-called new substances, and that's basically how it works in other jurisdictions, as well.
For existing substances, there has been, in Canada and in other countries, a legacy of substances that were around before there were requirements to notify and establish the safety of new chemicals, and that's what the DSL categorization and screening is intending to address.
We have been giving the government information at the categorization stage. They've also been using modelling information. And we will give government further information as they determine they need it for the chemicals that need to be assessed at the screening risk assessment stage. I think other countries will eventually take a similar approach, but we are ahead of them.
So that's how I understand that the system is working. I think it works very well for new chemicals, and I think that five years, six years, or ten years from now, we will look back on the experience with the categorization and screening and hopefully come to the conclusion that it also worked well in this area. It is just starting in the existing chemicals area. But we are far ahead of any other country in that respect.
I hope that helps to answer your question.