My comment on this will be similar to one that I made earlier in the meeting, which was that this would fundamentally change the scope of the right that is articulated in the bill, which at the moment is focused on individuals, people, and it would confer that right on humans as the rights holders.
Recognizing that nature or components of nature have rights of their own would represent a fundamental paradigm shift, and it's certainly not one that the government has yet contemplated or thought through fully, so in addition to that kind of fundamental change in the focus of the right that would be provided by Bill S-5, the bill as currently written doesn't contain any supplementary or complementary provisions that would provide legal personhood or any corresponding procedural or substantive rights to nature.
By contrast, of course, the way we've articulated the right to humans is supplemented in CEPA already, and in Bill S-5 with various additional procedural rights and additional substantive rights in order to give life to that new right. We have not provided for any such additional provisions related to the rights of nature in Bill S-5.