Mr. Pomerleau, I agree with you about all the things you have mentioned. As a new member of the committee, you ask very relevant questions. I would not dare tell you that I am sure about anything except that one must always be very careful.
I want to tell Canadians and Quebeckers that we have a regulatory regime that is focused on three things.
First, we have to do all we can, as regulators, on matters of safety and the environment to ensure that any drilling is done safely, that the environment is protected, and that the native communities are protected since they would be the first victims of any incident. However, I cannot give you any guarantee that there will never be an accident. Canadians should not believe that accidents would never happen.
As to the second step of regulatory process, if there were to be an accident, even if that probability is very low, the consequences would be very significant. So, we have to be prepared, as regulators, to ensure that the operator, helped if necessary by civil society, by the departments and the public agencies, has taken all the steps required to make sure that, in case of an accident, we would be able to contain and stop the event as quickly as possible.
The third step is to believe that we can always learn and do better. So, I can tell Canadians that the regulatory agencies will never be satisfied with existing regulations and will always try to find the additional measures that could be included in a process that, by definition, is aimed at always improving what we do.
Finally, as regulators, we work at arm's length from the government. We are not involved in policymaking. That being said, there is a process that we follow. If an application were to be received — we expect that we may receive one in 2012 or later — for drilling to start in 2014 or later, our role would be to look at it objectively to see if it meets all regulatory requirements and standards. Even if the operator were to tell us that everything will be fine, our reaction would be to ask how, in case something went wrong, we would be able to use all the infrastructures required to face the issue appropriately in the public interest.
Our public Arctic review is precisely aimed at answering the important question you have asked.