I will respond just on the first part of the question, with respect to clause 6.
Clause 6 obviously is a really important section of this legislation. It brings together how the federal government approaches emergencies. One of the key features of this piece of proposed legislation is a common and standardized approach to emergency management, so that in an emergency, it's absolutely clear who is responsible for what aspects of the emergency.
That was an important lesson learned from Hurricane Katrina. It was very difficult. The rules were unclear. So one of the lessons learned from Katrina was that in an emergency, clear rules and responsibilities are absolutely important. This brings us to clause 6, that each minister is responsible for preparing emergency management plans in their own area of expertise. Our minister is not an expert in every aspect of emergency management; he plays the lead in terms of coordinating emergency management activities.
So in terms of clause 6, each minister is responsible for preparing an emergency management plan in their respective jurisdictions or with respect to their mandate. They have to test and maintain those plans to make sure they're current, that they're not sitting on a shelf, and that they're also complementary to other ministers' plans, because there is an interdependent aspect of emergency management.
Each minister is also obliged to consult provinces and territories to make sure that those plans are also complementary. What's distinct or new in this act from the EPA is that the Minister of Public Safety provides guidance on how these plans will be conducted, how they will be maintained, and how they will be implemented. Our minister provides that guidance to ensure a common approach to emergency management at the federal level.