Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I apologize for not being able to attend the meetings. We have this House legislative committee on Bill C-2, which seems to be taking a little time. But we're back to our first love and interest, which obviously is environmental issues as they relate to our natural environment.
I wonder, Mr. Chairman, if our deputants, who I thank for being here, could.... I recall that when our environment committee was looking into the Devil's Lake diversion, we and the deputants had emphasized the precautionary principle with respect to not just looking at the issue in a very specific and narrow sense, but also looking at the ecosystem, the total implications with respect to that particular decision.
I wonder what came out of that initiative the committee took. What came out of it was the ongoing oversight and accountability that the committee could provide on matters relating not only to the Devil's Lake issue, but also to general diversions that had been put forward and were bringing into question the jurisdictional issues around international treaties, the annex agreements, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. There were a whole bunch of issues that came in.
So my question, Mr. Chairman, is what role do our deputants see with respect to this committee? If they could be armchair quarterbacks and say, look, we want to immerse the committee in the discussions and the decisions that are absolutely critical to where we want to go in terms of protecting our natural habitat—in particular, our water and our ecosystems and habitats—what role do they see for the committee? How would they direct us in terms of this committee's deliberations and how it could be as effective as possible?