This comes back to the whole question of mandatory duties on the Government of Canada within CEPA. Many of us, in terms of the expert submissions, have proposed specific mandatory duties. Right off the bat, when we talk about mercury air emissions, I'm reminded of this need for binding ambient federal air quality standards, which is absolutely a way that the federal government needs to exercise its jurisdiction and occupy the field.
When Dr. Krewski was talking about computational models looking at exposures, I don't know what those models do, but in the past we've been looking at average exposures. There are some communities, like the Aamjiwnaang First Nation near Sarnia, that are not subjected to average exposures. They're subjected to exposures that are five to 10 times higher than other communities. That's why we need binding ambient standards that the federal government enforces, as they do in the United States.
Yes, there will always be some levels of inequality in this country, but certain things should not be unequal. You shouldn't have to worry that the air your children breathe might kill them, no matter where you live in this country. So yes, I absolutely agree the federal government needs to occupy the field.
Similarly, you can look at the presumptive bans. Dr. Boyd has suggested that if a substance has been banned in another OECD country—this answers your question as well—there should be an automatic temporary ban until the minister or the proponent can demonstrate that for some reason we're different in Canada and it will be safe here. Those presumptive bans that just kick in when a certain trigger is passed are a really useful way to motivate government action.