I'm not letting the minister off the hook for not having accountability for dangerous materials and because he is now, with this bill, going to make historic changes to have unprecedented powers with respect to the bridges and tunnels that will move hazardous materials.
Quite frankly, there is no other comparable type of issue. Hazardous materials, even by the Department of Homeland Security, are classified as weapons of mass destruction. In fact, you've seen in Miami-Dade County, in Florida, that they've moved the rail spur, and they've also done it in other areas, like Washington. Cleveland has a law. They are prohibited, and they've moved hazardous materials to other lines, away from populations.
Yes, it might be in the regulations, but I'm not going to, as a legislator, sit here and pretend I'm comfortable waiting for things that might pop up through regulations that, later on, I'll have no real opportunity to control. That's why I think it's important in here. When you look at the whole context of this act, it gives the minister lots of powers, it adds a degree of accountability and responsibility, and it puts the onus on him to actually make sure that those other acts work for him.
I don't want to wait for a motion in this committee to address what I think is a very serious problem. If it's redundant, so be it. What's the problem, then? If it's going to be in the regulations, why can't we explicitly have it here? I think it provides more flexibility.