That's most interesting.
There's a lot of material we're trying to go through on SARA. We heard a lot of very useful testimony, some of which agrees and some of which disagrees. It looks as though quite a series of reviews has been going on in the department raising the same kind of issues that were raised before us. I guess what we're looking for is what further action has been taken to respond to those. One of them has been the socio-economic issue that has been raised over and over.
A lot of people raise the concern that there still aren't the policy instruments under the act. What they are looking for, I think, are the regulations. I'd be curious to know what direction you're going in to actually solidify that. I would concur with the comments by Mr. Bigras and the decision of the court that there is a tendency within agencies to get away from the legislation and start inventing through policy documents. It's important to keep referring back to what the law has actually prescribed.
An issue that's faced in all federal environmental legislation is the federal-provincial issue. I notice there is a national framework and the department has attempted to enter into federal-provincial agreements, but there don't seem to be very many of those.
Can you tell me why there's no agreement with Alberta and what the barriers might be there?