The obvious one was cumulative effects, and I'll just give you an example. There is a mining project in northeast B.C. that reached a conclusion of significant adverse cumulative effects. As a result of that, a decision by cabinet was required. There was an 18-month delay before cabinet actually ruled and justified the project so it could proceed. The issue had to do with the project, which is an underground coal mine with a very small footprint, and its contribution to the cumulative effects on caribou, and the traditional rights of indigenous peoples to hunt the caribou.
While this was going on, the NEB approved an energy pipeline whose impact on the same habitat was three times the size of this mine, so you had a very different conclusion from two separate federal agencies. No one, and I'm sure the previous government, would ever have anticipated that would be the outcome of CEAA 2012. We did not foresee the cumulative effects and that, being one of the only ones left standing under CEAA 2012, that would be the outcome, but that is what has happened. Among the issues that changes in this proposed legislation will fix will be, we hope, that particular issue.