Mr. Chair, that refers to a decision called the Connaught decision. It's a particular case that was recently ruled on by the Supreme Court of Canada. It's an obviously long decision, but to try to simplify, for any fees found to be part of a “regulatory scheme”--that is the phrasing used--the fees cannot exceed the cost of providing that regulatory scheme.
What does that mean in terms of implications for different departments? Generally, when we performed our audit, as Mr. Timmins indicated in his opening statement, we classified fees into two categories: those that were cost-based fees and those that were essentially value-based fees. This particular case could challenge that thought process by arguing that if any fee, regardless of whether it was cost-driven or value-driven, was found to be part of a regulatory scheme, the fee could not exceed the cost of providing that scheme.
We obviously did not have time to relook at all the fees, because this decision was very late in the performance of our audit. We simply raised it as being something that has recently happened and that must be considered by all departments and the central agencies in terms of their role in providing guidance.