I'm not sure I can fully answer that question because I can't tell you that we have done an analysis to determine how the bill complies with the environmental assessment process, either federal or provincial. You also know that, for major projects, there is a requirement, both federally and provincially, to carry out environmental assessments, which can lengthen the process.
Let's consider the remedies included in the bill and the possible interaction. I am still using fictitious examples here, to avoid giving you a legal opinion. If there was an environmental assessment done on a resource project requiring both a federal and a provincial assessment, and the federal government had to issue a permit, there is no doubt that clause 16, based on our reading of it, could trigger a process against the federal government in relation to the authorization to be issued, or previously issued, for the project.
Furthermore, under clause 23, there is also the possibility that an action could be brought by a third party against the project developer, if a federal law has been violated or if there is the risk of such a violation. That said, I realize that this is a hypothetical situation which has no basis in fact. At the same time, it is possible, within the assessment process as a whole, for an action to be brought under this bill. Will that lengthen the process? I can only provide speculate on that point.