Thank you for our question, Ms. Murray. The Bill provides for these things. If you check, the section is not a substitute for existing remedies under environmental legislation. It says just one thing. To improve that legislation, the bill provides that an individual will have the power to suggest potential changes to environmental policies and participating in making policy. It also provides that the Minister will have the power to respond to that request if it is not frivolous, and may also respond to the public. The body of legislation applies, the laws apply, this bill is not meant to replace environmental legislation. However, if the government systematically failed to enforce federal legislation, for example, it provides that an action could be brought.
However, it is not possible that just because an individual wants it, or because someone is not satisfied with a decision of a court under an environmental statute, they will be able to act like a court of appeal or the Supreme Court. That is not consistent with the spirit of the legislation. The bill of rights included in the bill allows for legal action. It also allows, in a fairly circumscribed way, for the public to suggest improvements to environmental legislation.
However, if certain existing laws are not enforced at all, there is an opportunity to go to court to compel the government to enforce its own laws. Why have laws if we aren't going to enforce them?
So that places some value on it, a fundamental right to environmental quality. It is a right that cannot just be put on ice, as circumstances change, or abandon or evade or enforce only in part. It is like a social contract among the public. There is recognition, in legislation, of the right to the environment, and the opportunity for individuals to have access to remedies if the federal government abandons its fiduciary role. If it abandons its role as protector of the environment, remedies are provided by legislation.