Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you for being here, Mr. Weiler. I have two quick questions for you.
The bill you've introduced would amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. From what I understand, this amendment would address a problem we've seen in the past: following a 2,700-litre spill, the owners of a vessel were acquitted of the charges against them, with the court ruling that it was up to the Crown to prove intent rather than requiring the polluter to demonstrate that they acted responsibly.
Your position is that this amendment would shift the burden of proof from the Crown to the polluter. The polluter would thus be responsible for demonstrating that appropriate measures were taken to prevent a given situation.
Having read the provisions in question, I have some questions. I'm not sure I understand what we're doing here. I understand the intent—you've explained it well—but I remain unconvinced by this amendment. Please note that I am not a lawyer, but a legislator. Can you explain to me how this minor amendment addresses the original problem?