Sure.
I think this was articulated in the debate the committee had on amendment NDP-4 last December, because this idea was also in the “duty” section of the bill, which we've gone through already. I think giving a right to nature, or elements of nature, would really change the scope of the right in the bill.
What's in the bill right now proposes recognition of a right of every individual to a healthy environment. This amendment is a completely different kind of concept. It would be a real shift in paradigm and require some careful consideration. There's nothing in the bill to operationalize it. Typically you have someone or something representing nature in order to give it standing in discussions, and the rest of that sort of mechanism isn't in the bill.