Ms. Flood, I appreciate that. I appreciate all of those things.
I'm asking these questions not because I want to be argumentative or be a problem for you, but I want to express some of the frustrations that all of us want to overcome because we all want to be environmentally sound in our decisions. We all do.
When we juxtapose a process that seems to retard decisions unnecessarily for an outcome that's going to be the same, and the main problem is not, as was asked by another colleague, the lack of staff, but might actually be the lack of coordination.... I've heard the three colleagues from Infrastructure Canada and Transport Canada say “We can't be the coordinating body unless these two triggers bring us in”, but it doesn't matter whether they are triggered in or not. Either Mr. Leboeuf or you are part of the action, one way or the other, it would appear to me.
But in major projects, like the two I gave you as an example...or a third one, with all the logs that are clogging up the rivers and streams in my province in northern Ontario, the fish habitat has been affected, whether you choose to recognize that or not. Nobody is talking about cleaning up those streams or those rivers. That will affect habitat and water quality. But in Mr. Shipley's riding, because some farmer wants to establish a more solid footing for the bridge he needs to go from one side of his farm to another.
Ms. Flood, I want to talk to the guys from Infrastructure Canada, because they seem to be pretty reasonable, but I have to constantly talk to you. And you're a reasonable person too, but you're pointing out that the Fisheries Act is extremely important. It applies to the farms in southern Ontario in the same way it efficiently applied to the Grand Banks and the raping of the cod and turbot in that area. You have to help me through this, Ms. Flood.