I wouldn't know. I would say that the no net loss policy is and has been an extremely important principle that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has applied, and the policy does indicate that, yes, if development is going to destroy fish habitat, then by all means let's.... Well, they basically have required until now that habitat be compensated for.
So that was a good idea to put pressure on developers so they can't just wipe out lakes under schedule 2 but have to do something else. That was a useful thing because, overall, as I think a number of the witnesses have said, we're losing habitat and for that reason we need to draw the line.