Environment committee  What I'm saying is that, if you read the bill, clause 16 should apply when federal authorization or federal action is required, which is the case when there is an environmental assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.

Environment committee  Someone could bring an action against the federal government for breaching its obligations under clause 16, or sue the project developer. That is possible.

Environment committee  I will not go as far as to say that this would put an end to the project, but a competitor could certainly bring an action. At that point, it would be up to a court of law to determine whether the parameters set out in the legislation have been met or not.

Environment committee  I don't think I'm prepared to go that far. At the present time, it is clear that water is a shared jurisdiction in Canada, depending on whether the waterway is limited to one province or not. I don't think this bill will necessarily change the case law that has built up over the

Environment committee  I'm not sure I can fully answer that question because I can't tell you that we have done an analysis to determine how the bill complies with the environmental assessment process, either federal or provincial. You also know that, for major projects, there is a requirement, both fe

Environment committee  There is no doubt we would rely on current rulings and the case law to try and interpret what is in this bill and what is also in other federal statutes.

Environment committee  Well, I cannot speculate as to the origin of this, but I agree with you that the building is something different.

Environment committee  I think we need to make a distinction between the bank and the building in which it's located.

Environment committee  I can give you a general answer. In our opinion, this is similar to the Constitution, in that there would be a power to declare a work or undertaking to be in the national interest. I am going to give you an example, but I am not saying that is the case. For example, if a company

Environment committee  I wouldn't think so, no. Constitutionally, that would be very surprising because, as a general rule, natural resources are primarily a provincial area of responsibility under the Constitution. I used a purely fictitious example, but I believe the classic example would be the tra

Environment committee  If the assumption is that we're not talking about a federal building, I would say no.

Environment committee  It's a matter of how the legislation is interpreted.

Environment committee  I think that is the first question which we really could not have expected to be asked. So, I am going to lay out some fairly general principles. First of all, I don't know who told you that or where that came from, and therefore I have no context for the premise of your questio

Environment committee  We can certainly give you a comparative overview between Ontario and Quebec and what this bill is proposing. I will let Mr. Melaschenko answer that question.

Environment committee  I will let Mr. Nielsen answer.