No. Except for the four works I have named, the act allows for some very limited flexibility through exemptions.
We're actually using, if you want, the exemption power specified in subsection 5(2) of the act to exclude some of the minor works. That's what we explain through all the pamphlets there.
The pamphlets are starting to be known now. We're already starting to see a small decrease in the number of requests, as you can see in the table. Hopefully in 2008 we will have a further reduction.
So this is done by exemption. It would be useful here to define minor works in the act and get rid of the four names. Today, if you have a golf course and there's a little creek on which you can navigate a canoe, and you want to build a bridge to cross between two fairways, you need a Navigable Waters Protection Act application. It's a bridge, and we can't exclude those four named works because the act gives no exemption power for those four.
If you could get rid of those four, that would be another excellent step toward improving the situation.