Thank you for the question.
I think there are two angles to answering that. I think the first is that the definition of final disposition is clear here. It is imperative to pick up on the notion that even though we are shipping loads that are defined as recycling, prior consent doesn't mean that the loads that actually are being received are actually being recycled. The issue is not just prior consent. The issue is tracking this material to ensure that it's actually being recycled.
I will just make the comment that in the material we're actually processing here on domestic soil, we sometimes have 30% to 35% residual kick-out. That means that 35% of a load from Canadian processors as well actually ends in landfill. Banning loads that are destined for final disposition, as the bill does in its language, is not going to address that issue.
I do know that we have more Canadian recycling infrastructure capacity here than we are using, and the leakage into other jurisdictions actually prevents industry.... It certainly doesn't encourage investments on Canadian soil to enhance recycling and expand the industry here. I think what we need is more transparency on how and where this material is being generated and where it's being managed domestically, as well as tracking it through to final disposition in exports.