I thank the member for a very interesting question.
I appeared before the committee that was studying Bill C-5 as it was going through the process. What I said then, and will essentially repeat now, is that I think Bill C-5 is a very strong signal that there is an interest to build things. Our concern continues to be that there are other challenges, which the bill certainly facilitates if you happen to be one of the projects of national interest, or as some people call them, the PONIs. If you're a PONI, there is a concierge approach to moving projects forward. We see it, though, as hopefully setting the stage for how we will more broadly address projects.
We recognize that while we have concerns with a number of regulatory and legislative challenges, they can't all be fixed at once. We do recognize that's the case.
We're hoping that the experience with the Major Projects Office and how it rolls out its programming can then apply to, for example, the medium and smaller projects. Our future isn't going to be just a handful of major projects; it's going to be hundreds or thousands of projects.
Hopefully, the work of the Major Projects Office is going to show us the way to get projects built more efficiently, but we still have to address some of the core fundamental issues with impact assessments, the Fisheries Act and so on.