The science and technology branch has an important role to play in this, but we're not the policy setters and we're not the regulator. But when you monitor something, attention gets paid to it, and people need to respond to what the monitoring is showing.
A good example of that was when some of our scientists and others around the world showed that the ozone in the atmosphere was decreasing. Another very good example is work our scientists were part of that showed that acid rain was a significant problem probably in the mid-seventies to early eighties. When you have this ongoing monitoring looking at contaminants or pollutants of interest, then it is incumbent on the policy-makers and the regulators....
There was a Canada-U.S. air quality agreement, and action was taken in terms of emissions from vehicles and other things that really resulted in a very significant decline in the nitric oxides and the sulphur oxides. So you see very significant decreases in those contaminants and in acid rain and the consequent damage to the environment caused by acid rain.
It's the same thing for particulate matter. Ozone at the ground level is an important component of smog, so whenever you take action on these, you're getting benefits for human health and you're getting benefits for the environment writ large as well.