Thanks, Mr. Chair. In my earlier remarks, I mentioned how, during the development of the bill, the public consultations that were held, there were a number of items that the departmental staff had raised, maybe even some expectations, dare I say, because those were brought to the attention of standing committee during the review of the bill. There were expectations raised around an environmental registry, that there would be methods to propose policies, programs, agreements, initiatives, maybe even an ability to comment on those, as well, when they became posted to the environmental registry.
Through the environmental registry, there was some discussion of the ability to make public comments on items that were posted there, including draft regulations. There was to be a definition of a right to healthy environment. Public trust was to be established and an obligation placed on GNWT. There was to be dispute resolution. Investigations would be carried out by inspectors.
That is not what people found in the bill when they started to review it. Can someone explain to me why those concepts, those items were dropped or not incorporated into the bill before us? Thanks, Mr. Chair.