I guess when I was looking at this and saying that I'm cognizant of the fact that it's now seven years since we had the expert panel, making progress on this file has apparently not been easy. The idea of enabling legislation obviously has some merit in the sense of at least taking a step.
The thing we were trying to caution against in the expert panel report is, do not fall into the trap that I just spoke to in my previous comments of publishing a table of numbers, publishing a series of penalties for not meeting those numbers, and leaving it at that. Proposals like that have been out there in the past. I testified before a Senate committee on a proposal to make drinking water under the drug act and regulate it that way. That's not going to get the job done.
To answer your question, I've offered this suggestion. There's been a ton of excellent work done around the world to come up with this drinking water safety plan approach. We don't need to reinvent the wheel. This was developed by WHO for communities in sub-Saharan Africa and in Tokyo, Japan. One size fits all in the concepts that are being proposed. One simple measure is to provide some guiding principles to this act to say we don't need to reinvent the wheel. All this good thinking has gone forward in describing what drinking water safety plans need to be. This act, regardless of anything else that it's intended to do, should achieve those objectives.