Okay, thank you.
I want to address the issue you brought up about “national” as opposed to “federal”. I think you brought up a very interesting point. You said that as a practical matter, if we expect it to be a “national” sustainable development strategy, we should be consulting the provinces.
I'll next be asking about the list on the schedule, and there are a number of issues or substances that deal with provincial jurisdiction, as brought to our attention by Mr. Bigras.
But there hasn't been any consultation in this process. If this is a “national” plan, there was no consultation with the environment ministers. I think the commissioner's report and what we're doing in the study or review deal with the federal departments and therefore could be a “federal” sustainable strategy as opposed to a “national” one.
Could you elaborate a little bit on that? I think it's a very interesting point. Maybe we should not be calling it a “national” but should be calling it a “federal” strategy.