To start with, I think we're certainly very supportive of enabling tools and trying to streamline our policies and regulations, and the provincial government is going through a similar exercise. I think it's necessary.
The challenge with the changed wording of the Fisheries Act is that I think we aren't fully aware yet of what it will mean for us. We've been working with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to try to better understand what the wording changes will mean. When we're talking about habitat it's pretty clear what we're talking about, rather than ecosystems and “adverse impacts to fisheries”.
I'll tell you a little story. I was previously with the Ministry of the Environment, and a lot of their legislation deals directly with adverse impact. It's that kind of wording that makes it difficult to understand the level of enforcement, how far down the road you can go to justify those words “adverse impact”. It's understanding what the new wording means and the definitions around the new wording that will help Ontario understand its role.
In that respect I think it will be a challenge. It's certainly a challenge that we face every time new legislation comes in. It's more a matter of working through what it will mean for the province, for the federal government, and where our roles and responsibilities diverge and where they meet.
We did find out early on that you were considering changes but weren't sure what those changes were. I'm with the applied research group, so we wouldn't find out immediately. We would probably find out through the work we do with our policy folks.
Ala, do you have anything to add?