Most of my questions are going to be to Professor Doelle, but to Mr. Carlton, if I can offer a better suggestion to you, considering that you want municipalities recognized.... Although I have to share with you that my experience with municipalities involved in hearings and major projects is usually that they're supporting it exactly as it goes forward and rarely support more conditions on the project. That's my experience in Alberta.
It doesn't appear obvious in the definitions of “jurisdiction” that this includes municipalities. I think it would be a good idea for us to refer to the legal people, the legislative drafters, and ask them whether municipalities are included. If they're not, then I think it'd be a good idea to add them in. I fully agree with you that I don't think municipalities come under “public”. I have much bigger questions about the definition of “public”, because I don't think that indigenous peoples think they're “public”. There are even bigger problems with this bill than what you're identifying. I think you're raising a genuine point, and I think it'll be up to us to look at it if we want to make sure that the municipalities' issues are heard, and that we find the best ways to do that in the bill. I think this might be the best place to put it.
Professor Doelle, thank you very much for your papers, your blogs, and your submission. I am absolutely delighted that in your submission one of the areas you focus on is the panel. I'm deeply troubled by this bill because there's absolutely no clarity on when a review is going to be by the agency, when it's going to be by a panel, or when a panel is appointed. You're making some very good suggestions. We're challenged for time. We have to have all our amendments in by next Tuesday. I would welcome any suggestions that you recommend.
You're also recommending that a panel should provide in its decision a summary of the evidence in each of the factors and the recommendations for a response. Professor, what troubles me deeply is that whether the agency is going to review the matter, whether or not the matter should even be reviewed and assessed by the agency, whether it's reviewed by a panel, and whether it's in the public interest, they're all different factors. Do you think that's a problem? Do you think there should be consistency throughout on what the factors are that are taken into account and not just “considered”?