That's not cost-recovered. When Jean-Claude says that the costs of the review panel are cost-recovered, it's the cost of administering the panel itself. The participant funding, which is awarded, all comes out of a special budget that is allocated by Parliament specifically for this purpose, so it's closed fund allocated for this purpose. The proponent does not pay for those costs, so there's no conflict of interest there.
The other point I would make in terms of cost recovery is that the only place in which the agency is able to recover costs from a proponent is in the case of a panel. But in the case of comprehensive studies, proponents are required to submit a detailed environmental impact statement as part of the environmental assessment process, and they will typically hire consultants to do that. So that's not cost-recovered by the agency or the government, but it's a cost borne by the proponent in bringing forward their request to government.