If I could clarify my point, Mr. Chair, which is if you read proposed section 42 as it's set out in the bill, it's a review of proposed sections 24 to 41 of the act, I believe, after 10 years. That's just those sections of the act, not the whole piece of legislation. That's the point I was making. You would have a situation where the government is required to review part of a statute, not the whole statute, in five years, and then the rest of the statute in 10 years. That's inconsistent.
If it's NDP policy that statutes be reviewed every five years, that's a policy they may wish to put forward, but I would suggest they put that forward in a separate bill. The purpose of this bill, as we've been discussing here today, is environmental protection. We don't want to disturb the other elements of this legislation that have been properly debated in previous Parliaments and are there for a reason. It wouldn't make sense to come up with a new review period for some sections of these statutes when there is a standard that is set in other legislation.
Perhaps we could hear from the officials on this point.