Let me simply say, Mr. Godfrey, that as with any government initiative--or, I would propose, any draft bill we're looking at--in a very real sense the devil's in the details. It depends what goes in the schedule. It depends what the targets are that are put forward and so on.
If it's developed in too heavy a way initially, for example, with too many requirements to involve too many people in it, one might argue that it might sink under its own weight. However, if one starts in a relatively constructive but nevertheless small and practical way and adds to it over time, one could guard against that happening.
I'm not sure I'm answering the question, Mr. Godfrey, but as I understood Mr. Bigras' interventions a while back, he was concerned about whether or not the federal government here would be mandating municipal behaviour, let alone provincial behaviour.
I guess when I look at this draft bill--and perhaps I'm looking at it incorrectly--I see the measures in the first iteration of this bill, in the annex, as federal government measures. Those are the ones that my office could assess the fairness of. And that's fair enough to do. If they were beyond that, if they were into provincial measures as well as municipal measures, certainly for the next while they'd be very difficult for me or my successor to provide any comment on, because frankly we don't audit these other levels of government.