Absolutely, as usual. He's a very articulate gentleman. I've heard him quoted in the House of Commons many times.
He asked all of you groups if you were consulted on these changes in Bill C-9, and I truly believe that you probably weren't consulted on Bill C-9. But going back over history, this discussion about this process has gone on for a long time. Most of you here are on the record as suggesting that these changes should take place, and that rather than having 40 or 50 federal authorities spread across government, we should narrow the focus down on environmental assessments.
In fact, Mr. Hazell, when you were executive director of the Sierra Club you said that the conduct of comprehensive studies could be transferred from federal authorities to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. That was back in the mid-nineties at some point.
My good friend Elizabeth May, in her former role as executive director of the Sierra Club, made a similar statement in 2002 in front of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development, and I will quote her as well.
Now, Liberals, stay seated in your chairs.
So we were extremely hopeful with the 1993 red book,
--I'm not sure which iteration of the red book that was--
where there was a commitment that CEAA would receive royal assent, but it would be with significant strengthening and the creation of an independent Canadian environmental assessment agency that would be more like the CRTC in its functions. That would take us a step away from self-assessment, it would create rigour and professionalism in that body, it would create more predictability for industry, and it would create decisions that were not merely advice to a minister, as, if it was like the CRTC, those decisions would be binding unless cabinet overturned them.
Having said that, you've been consulted over the years—most groups, I won't say all. You've put your positions on paper. So if this bill, as part of Bill C-9, is doing what you'd asked for previously, for a comprehensive study of the environmental assessment of most major projects, moving that over to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, have your views changed?
Can I first direct this to Ms. Kwasniak of the Alberta Wilderness Association? I used to be a member of that association, so we'll give her the chance to answer that first.