I'd like to continue down that avenue.
Professor Elgie mentions the issue of project splitting, which has been litigated many times in the past. His recommendation is to adopt a solution through a connected actions approach, where the interdependency is brought into play. I wonder if you could comment on the appropriateness of that.
I take the point that at the end of the day, the interconnectedness of all these components is going to be brought to bear in both a provincial and a federal assessment setting, and the end goal has to be one project, one assessment. The trick that has to be turned is getting to a federal law that best encourages the strongest possible impact assessment approach, yielding public acceptance of good projects and weeding out bad ones.
Please comment on that interdependency, the project splitting, and the connected actions aspect.