I'm not sure how this meshes with other parts of the bill where we talk about adverse impacts.
I find it unnecessary. I've never participated in a tribunal review where the proponent didn't spend most of the time talking about the economic benefits of the project. I think it probably conflicts with other parts of the bill that simply talk about adverse impacts.
Does this mean that we're going to remove the phrase “adverse impacts” everywhere in the bill it's stated? If so, I would find that unfortunate.