For us as legislators, the devil is in the details. High-level principles and broad statements that are unsupported are easy to say, but when legislation comes down, it has to be specific and geared to certain activities. Again, the inescapable conclusion, from what you've said, given your views on watersheds, which I actually share, is that DFO needs to be involved in the planning of shopping centres and subdivisions and where roads go in urban areas.
Do you think DFO will ever have the resources to do that? Would it have any effect?
Personally, in my own view, I'd rather direct resources into the direct conservation and enhancement of fish habitat, rather like what was done by the recreational fisheries conservation partnerships program, where real and measurable progress was made on the conservation of fish habitat.
Anyway, I think my time is just about up. Thank you very much.