I'm afraid I'm just going to repeat the position I articulated earlier in discussion. I think we agree that the issue here is with respect to the reintroduction, via section 44.1, of proposed subparagraph (g.1)(ii) “the determination of whether to grant a waiver”. Therefore, “prescribing processes for meaningful public participation in the determination of whether to grant a waiver” would appear to contradict the obligation that was created earlier this week to publish decisions about waivers as soon as possible.
It also runs counter to the basic process for or purpose of a waiver, which is to support risk assessments and to ensure that risk assessors have access to all the information needed to make their science-based decisions. This is not a public participation process. This is a science-based process.