The simplest thing is to look at numerical standards and say that a smaller number per contaminant must be safer than a higher number. But if both of them have safety factors of a 100-plus, reducing a number that already has a safety factor of 100-plus to make it 200-plus achieves nothing. That's the simple interpretation that will likely be put on things.
I accept the intentions of MP Scarpaleggia in wanting to have safer water. Guidelines could focus on...as I've talked about in the drinking water safety plan approach and have outlined in some detail with many references in my written brief. That is the international best standard that Ontario, Alberta, Australia, and the World Health Organization have adopted. If you call that a drinking water quality criterion—it's not numerical; it's operational—then you can ensure safer drinking water. It's a question of where your focus is. Simply lowering the numbers doesn't accomplish much. That implies that we have evidence that the numbers we have right now are causing ill health, and I don't believe that's true.