I don't believe the term “equivalency” is actually used in the new act. In the substitution section I think it says the minister must form an opinion that the provincial process would be “an appropriate substitute”. In my view, that provides significant discretion on the part of the minister to make that determination. However, this is a very peculiarly worded section, because once the minister makes the determination that the process would be an appropriate substitute, the minister must, on the request of the province, approve the substitution of that process.
It's a very curiously worded provision. I think it follows to say it's badly worded. Please amend it.