Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
I'd like to ask a question, if I could, of Mr. Lloyd.
Thank you very much for attending, ladies and gentlemen, this afternoon.
Mr. Lloyd, if I can, I want to cut right to the chase, because we've worked together in the past on different issues. I want to go to your brief. In the conclusion you say that CEPA ought to be used to differentiate between good and poor environmental performers, and that this act should be used to support the use of industry responsibility programs to recognize and encourage good-performing companies. The reader and the viewer is left hanging with a question of just how it is we should do this.
In fact, our government worked hard with you and so many other stakeholder groups for years to, for example, devise eco-efficiency indicators that would allow for meaningful comparison between not only companies in your Responsible Care program but for companies that hail from other sectors, like pulp and paper, for example. I want to put this to you. First, if you could, could you help us understand, for example, whether eco-efficiency indicators could be used and ought they to be reflected in the act? And secondly, ecological fiscal reform is, most western democracies now realize, the way forward. We need to find the way in which we're going to have a meaningful intersection of fiscal policy and environmental policy. Can you tell us, for example, how that might be used to achieve your objective, which is to have government recognize and reward good performers over bad performers?