Two things were done, mainly. Both are related to amendments made to the law last year.
Regarding the problems identified by the commissioner in connection with the multiple levels of authority involved in the assessments, it is precisely for that reason that the assessment of major projects that are subject to in-depth studies was entrusted to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. It was to avoid having several levels of authority legally responsible for conducting assessments of the same projects.
The problem has been ongoing for certain preliminary studies that could involve several responsible authorities at that stage of the proceedings, but as to the bigger projects that require in-depth studies, amendments were made that essentially settled those issues last year. The other change that took place since the report of the commissioner results from the Supreme Court decision handed down last year in the MiningWatch case, in connection with the scope of the project. The court clearly indicated that the scope of the project must be congruent with the scope that was originally proposed by the promoter.