There is a lot in this bill, and frankly I think we could use you here for several days. There are a lot of detailed questions to ask as well, but I'm going to try to combine them. I think when we have you back here for clause-by-clause study, it's going to take us a lot more than one meeting because of that.
One of the things that has puzzled me and a lot of the people who reviewed this bill is the government starts out with the proposed section 48.11 strident principle, the polluter pays principle, is now going to be applied to pipelines, yet the whole rest of that part of the bill sets about diminishing liability. We're left very confused as to what actually the government is intending to set forth. It looks pretty clear by the provisions of the bill that, in fact, there is no intention to have absolute liability. One example is the decision to override the Fisheries Act, which of course imposes absolute liability.
We raise other questions, as well as what my colleague from the Liberal Party raised, essentially, on how the other part of the bill then shifts liability to the public. Related to that, I'm left with a number of questions, and that's mainly because, as you go through the bill, a lot of information about how this bill is going to be applied is going to be by yet-to-be promulgated regulations. That applies in almost every part of the bill, including the determination of the maximum liability, which is in fact not a billion dollars. It could be an amount to be set by regulations.
My first question right off the top is, are you in the process right now of promulgating all these regulations under the bill? Will those be reviewed by the broader public?