I'd be happy to take that.
The short answer is no, we haven't developed a set of criteria, but in making the recommendation to review the minor works order, I think that's exactly what we intend to do. It's not for Brock and me to say. It's the engineers and the lawyers who are building and approving these projects who really can provide better advice on what would be appropriate to include under the minor works order.
I would just emphasize, and to tie into your earlier comments, why we think that's important is that, previous to 2009 and 2012, there were many water bodies that were on the schedule. That was reduced, and now there's a new process to add waters to the schedule. That's there and we support that. Now you have the application in the act for all navigable waters. It's a great expansion of the act. Works and undertakings on those waters don't have to receive the same authorization—we support that—but now there's a new process of notification, public consultation, and a dispute resolution mechanism that the minister is responsible for. That's a brand new process and it's going to take time for all of us, I think, consistent with the comments that Mr. Fisher made, for the public to understand what that process is, for the municipalities and their proponents to understand what that process is.
I think our three recommendations around the Navigation Protection Act are really to say let's pause here and recognize this broader application of the act, and have the experts, the engineers, municipalities, etc., be able to say there are some other types of works and activities that really would be more appropriately placed under minor work orders in this context for non-scheduled water bodies. Then ensure that the process, as Mr. Fisher was saying, for notifying the public is as clear as possible to follow and doesn't create new administrative burdens or complexities, especially for smaller communities. Finally, the timeline that's in place for that public consultation period and for the dispute resolution process should be adhered to and reviewed in the future if it's not appropriate.