Yes. Taking too many shortcuts means you don't have a complete review. It means you have a narrow subset of a review where you look at some of the issues. For example, we've just completed a comprehensive study of the Detour Lake Gold Mine re-opening. It has been a paper exchange. There have been a number of open houses where people can go in and look at posters and ask questions on a one-to-one basis, but you don't have the opportunity to really evaluate the project and require a full examination of the alternatives. What are the alternatives of running the project for 16 years at 60,000 tonnes versus 30 years at 25,000 tonnes per day—for community benefits, for managing environmental impacts? You really need a coordinated approach.
In the Ontario permitting process, we have permitting documents that contradict each other going in—one to the ministry of Northern Development and Mines and one to the Ministry of the Environment—and they're describing the same project differently. So I completely support a coordinated approach, but if “streamlined” means “shortcut”, then it does a disservice on all counts.