Mr. Chairman, this is beginning to have some reflection on what hamlets are going to take over in the future, obviously. Like I said, no doubt there is going to be a fair amount of expense involved, if in fact federal fisheries decides that this project is going to have an effect on fish. I do not know how come after thirteen years of putting gravel on the beach they decide it is affecting the fish in the water, but that is federal fisheries for you.
My point here is out of the monies that are given towards the actual project if the major portion of it is spent on hearings, there is not going to be much left to put on the beach except possibly the paperwork. So what I am concerned about here is that as communities take on projects, they seem to be left holding the bag with a lot of spin-off costs that come up later.
I am not sure whether the department can really wash their hands of the project that simply. Does the department feel that they have some responsibility to work with the community to assure these legislations are, in fact, reviewed before the project starts so that there are no surprises like this? Does the department have any ongoing monitoring in that manner?