Can the minister tell us, because he just mentioned municipalities, if a mayor wants to backfill a precious wetland, why does it matter that the project is under $10 million or over $10 million? Isn't it the value of the ecosystem...? As a former environment minister--both of us--doesn't he look first at the value of the ecosystem, not the value of the project? If you're destroying an ecosystem with something worth $11 million, is that worse than destroying it with something worth $9 million? Why have this artificial limit they want to bring in on the value of projects? He made the same mistake in his introductory remarks, talking about a stretch of road that costs so much, as if the cost of the project had anything to do with the value of the wetland or the ecosystem you're trying to protect. What's the relation between the cost of the project and what has to be protected? There is none.
On February 12th, 2009. See this statement in context.