Environment committee  We try to do the compensation plans to offset any impacts. Then we monitor to make sure there is an effectiveness so that our compensation plans are actually doing what we thought they would do. We work very closely with the companies to make sure that's happening.

Environment committee  I think what's.... On phase two of the water management framework, there are other elements being considered. That science will probably help inform some of where we're going on phase two to better define some of those indicators.

Transport committee  As I see it, there are two parts to the Highway 25 project. For the first part, on the south side, the company has already received authorization. For the second part, a compensation plan had to be developed. We're reviewing that plan. Authorization will probably be given later.

Transport committee  I don't see it as much of a change for DFO. Where we were working with Transport Canada before, if it's a project that requires Fisheries Act authorizations, we will still be there. I don't think changing the Navigable Waters Protection Act changes things for us.

Transport committee  I know we've received a lot of criticism over a number of years, and we've certainly made a lot of efforts to move forward in really streamlining our approval processes, figuring out when we need to be there. In our department right now, what we have done over the last three to

Transport committee  I don't want to leave the impression that because of the changes to the Navigable Waters Protection Act, DFO does not do environmental assessments. If there are impacts and there is a project that will have an impact, by law we have to be there, unless we do something to change t

Transport committee  Certainly our intent is to work within the Navigable Waters Protection Act, but we would still be tied by law through the Environmental Assessment Act and the Fisheries Act. So our intent is to always ensure that we don't impede competitiveness and cause undue delays.

Transport committee  I would have to check on that, because I would not have that detail. I will have to get back to you.

Transport committee  I really don't have the details. I apologize, but our regional offices, if they were here, would probably be able to respond to that directly. I do apologize for that, but what I would say is if there were any impacts to fish and fish habitat, we would definitely be there. If it'

Transport committee  It doesn't preclude that there wouldn't be any federal regulator on the project just because the funding hasn't flowed. There may be a regulator, such as DFO, involved in that project. I'm not sure what project we're talking about, so I can't give any specifics. But certainly we

Transport committee  I would definitely agree that it is a challenge, because DFO is pretty well everywhere. It's interesting with the question on resources. One of the ways we're trying to find the balance is by applying some risk management principles and looking at how we can mitigate. It's not

Transport committee  I wish you had asked Yves first. I think the purpose of environmental assessment is that it's really a planning tool. As regulators, before we make a decision we have to assess what the environmental impacts are of those decisions. That is the purpose of the environmental act.

Transport committee  I don't see that the amendments that are being proposed are going to change our role other than that we may not be interacting with Transport Canada as much as we would normally as a regulator. But that doesn't preclude their interacting with us as a federal authority, as an expe

Transport committee  That's correct.

Transport committee  Yes, if there's an impact on fish or fish habitat, then there would have to be a Fisheries Act authorization. If we were to issue a fisheries authorization or request the issuance of a Fisheries Act authorization, we would have to embark on an environmental assessment prior to is