I guess I can't comment on that because I haven't read the bill.
My only point will be—and these are the comments I made earlier—is that when people talk about moving towards achieving Kyoto or part of Kyoto, and so on, in the four- to six-year timeframe we're talking about, I would say we can do almost nothing. I think people don't understand the inertia of capital stock investment and human behaviour.
As a system modeller, the timeframe of four to six years is a flash to me. In fact, I'm now doing scenarios for the national round table on Canada getting to 2050 with a 50% reduction. It looks like it might be extremely difficult to make that. The technologies are in place or are there, but the capital stock turnover and the inertia in the system is incredible. If I can bring anything to this table for people who are not doing these kinds of models of the economy, it's to get them to understand how much inertia is in our system. Sure, a new computer can come into the system very quickly, but it's different when we're talking about major infrastructure, major industrial facilities, energy conversion plants, and so on.