This is an attempt to recognize the capacity. I know that some other amendments have been proposed that I think are trying to do the same thing, but we heard again and again about the different capacities that exist in the port authorities in this country, based on their size, the number of employees, their revenues, etc.
What this amendment attempts to do is to leave a kind of general direction, which states that:
For the purposes of this Part, the Governor in Council may make regulations respecting the impact of the operation of a port by a port authority on the environment, including climate change, and the impact of climate change on the operation of a port.
It stops there and doesn't go into the prescriptive six individual things a port authority needs to do. It's less prescriptive and more general in nature. It allows for some flexibility on the part of the cabinet to direct ports on what they must do and what they must report when it comes to the environment and climate change.
It takes away the prescriptive nature and leaves it as more general, which I think will be more palatable for the smaller ports that don't have the capacity or are dealing with four or five employees. I think that trying to do all of this reporting would be very onerous for some of the smaller ports. Obviously, for the bigger ports, they're already doing this, in large part.
That was the attempt of the amendment: to make it less prescriptive.