Yes, I think in our specific submission, we don't go into detail about either the registry or the auditing, but some of the joint submissions we're participating in with other NGOs do address that.
Ultimately, any project that either harms or has the potential to harm fish habitat should at the very least be reported to DFO so that DFO is aware of it and can assess cumulative effects, which is important. We also want them to address cumulative effects. We recognize that DFO doesn't have the resources to investigate anything but a fraction of the projects that occur in Canada, but if we're going to allow proponents to self-assess, work efficiently, and follow best practices in the water, that's excellent.
We just need to be able to make sure they're accountable. Whether that's auditing a random subset of 1% or 5% of these projects, that would provide that accountability and it would also allow us to review different classes of projects to find out where best management practices guidelines are working, where this is an effective system, and where the system needs to be resolved.
It's not all about enforcement or accountability for proponents. It's also about improving how we manage fish habitat.