As you said, there's always liability. But generally speaking, the courts have never made the government liable because it issued a regulation.
The liability here is mostly if there is a terrorist event and the government requests that a company activates its ERAP, or emergency response assistance plan. Then the government would have to pay the company and would be liable for any damages incurred by the company in assisting us to deal with a terrorist incident. This is very important, because the capacity of the government as a whole.... There is a lot of capacity at different levels, either at the municipal, provincial, or federal level. But there's a lot of capacity to deal with nasty stuff, like chemical incidents, in the private sector.
But today, if it's a safety incident or accident, the companies are forced to fix the thing themselves, to activate the plan themselves, and they incur the liability for this. If there is a terrorist incident and there is a chemical leak somewhere of a very nasty chemical, we have private capacity out there. So the provisions in here will allow the government to direct the company to help us deal with this chemical leak, for instance, but will assume the liability. That is probably the biggest liability I can see in the provisions of the bill now.