Thank you.
Since I don't have the confidence, the vocabulary or the grammar necessary to speak very accurately in French, I will answer in English. I apologize.
The problem is that the Canada Shipping Act is a bit of an anachronism. Having the coast guard manage Sable Island is a bit of an anachronism. As the coast guard retreats and as lighthouses become less important with global navigation, there's a vacuum there at the moment. Something has to be done to fill that vacuum. After consultations, we came to the conclusion that Parks Canada and the regime around that and the conversation with the Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board was the best protection.
I don't know if some of you saw the Chronicle Herald this morning, but the tour company, Adventure Canada, wants to have a ship offshore of Sable. A couple of hundred people will be there. They want to do tours off the island. Sable Island is becoming more and more accessible, and our question is.... The danger to Sable is posed by people who want to come to the island, and we don't have a regime for managing it at the moment. We need to set up a system for visitation. We need to set up a system where people on the island are carefully regulated.
If I could go back to a question from Ms. Duncan, Parks Canada will have the final say on ecological integrity on all other issues, but there will be a conversation as it relates to oil and gas. On everything else, Parks Canada will regulate visitation and activities. There will be a conversation with Canada-Nova Scotia, the government process there. Ecological integrity is threatened more by people. Adventure Canada is quite a reputable company, so I don't want to.... But people have said that they want to have destination weddings, extreme sports, all kinds of things, and we don't have a management plan in place, which is something we desperately need. That's what this legislation does.