Thanks, Mr. Chair. In my remarks earlier I mentioned that this bill has been in place for 29 years. It is not very well-used. What has happened in those 29 years is that the concept of environmental rights has evolved. I mentioned how 149 of 193 countries in the world now have constitutional recognition of environmental rights in one form or another. Unfortunately, Canada is not one of those countries.

I also talked about how expectations were raised by the department during the public consultations of the bill around matters like definitions of a right to healthy environment, public trust, and so on. That would certainly, in the eyes of some of the people who appeared before the standing committee, create an expectation that there might be more of a rights-based approach to environmental rights in this bill. That is not really what we got, but certainly, around the world, this is an area of evolving law, and a lot of jurisdictions are moving towards this environmental rights-based approach.

Given that this bill has only very infrequently, only once, ever been reviewed, this is an area of evolving law that some things were promised and perhaps not delivered, committee felt, or at least I felt, that it would be important to put a checkpoint in the future where there could be some reconsideration of the review of the bill or the act and its implementation to allow for a considered review of it and see if further improvements could be made.

This would require a review in 2025, six years down the road. It is a one-time review, all at the Minister's discretion, and would require that the Minister table a report in the House. This doesn't have to be a huge onerous exercise, maybe even not as onerous as the exercise that the department went through in proposing the changes in what is before us.

As a one-time review in this area of evolving law, I would hope that Members would see fit to agree that this is something reasonable to insert into the bill.