Thank you very much for the question.
I think the first reason it's important is that the province was very clear that without changes to the legislation it was not going to transfer the land. Having an entire contiguous body of land under a single regime that is a known regime, that builds on an institution that is the oldest national park service in the world, is infinitely better than having a situation in which you have two, three, four, or several blocks of land under several different regimes, maybe for a considerable period of time.
As people have noted, this work has been going on for some 30 or 40 years. At different points in time, people have gotten very close to things. Certainly, the opportunity to get the transfer under way—and I can confirm that the discussions have been very serious and are moving forward and that we have a time frame now in sight, next year—provides a very exciting opportunity to bring this single block of land, from the shores of Lake Ontario all the way up to the Oak Ridges Moraine, under a single piece of legislation to govern the whole thing.
The province's insistence on changes that they judged acceptable—and they have seen the language around ecological integrity—is something we have been able to manage in conversations with a broad range of players. Agriculture has been mentioned, but we've also worked with first nations in these conversations, as an important part of this. We're obviously trying to be very true to the core purpose of Parks Canada, as reflected by the fact that what is imported here is in fact the very language from the Canada National Parks Act.