Linda Duncan can help me with this too, because in my understanding of the Fisheries Act damages are recoverable for more than commercial fisherman and damages are recoverable for damage under section 42.1.
It's not in conflict. We don't create a conflict for proposed subsection 48.12(7) by deleting proposed subsection 48.12(8). Rather, by continuing with the latter, it doesn't seem to me that there's any reason why damages should not be recoverable under subsection 42.1 under the Fisheries Act. Deleting proposed subsection 48.12(8) doesn't create any statutory interpretation problems with proposed subsection 48.12(7). The fact that they're also liable under any other act is no reason to remove access to section 42.1 of the Fisheries Act; it doesn't create a conflict, if you see what I'm saying.
So why take away the access to damages under section 42.1 of the Fisheries Act, which has been used as, Ms. Duncan says, for a very long time and as a pretty meaningful measure for environmental protection?