Yes. Thanks for letting me expand on this.
First, I'd say that while climate change is an incredibly difficult challenge, as we all know, it's actually comparatively much simpler to at least set targets for biodiversity. There are so many facets to biodiversity. It's such a complicated subject. That's why we're proposing in our amendments that the act be prescriptive about the areas that a government has to consider when it's setting targets, because there are, as we've both alluded to, so many drivers of biodiversity decline.
Also, then, when we're talking about biodiversity, we're talking about species, habitat and connectivity and ecosystems, and we need to have multiple targets so that we're attacking all of the root causes of nature loss and also making sure that we're protecting all the values. Targets are important because they tell us where we ought to be. How are we going to measure our progress if we don't have the signposts along the way?
When we talk about accountability, it's the same as under the Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act. We're not so much talking about legal accountability, because federalism and the provinces also have a huge role to play in protecting nature. We're not thinking that under this act—