Thank you.
I think that's important, because there is some allusion being made that prices will be different for an operation on the Canadian side of the border on a greenhouse gas tonne than they would be to the south of the border.
A certain clause of this bill, clause 10, talks about the minister coming forward and producing a report both to Parliament and to the Canadian people outlining the past year's effort and then going forward over the next in terms of expectations and costs per tonne. I can recall a bill in which this Parliament moved well over $1 billion for an ethanol subsidy, a biofuel subsidy that was to go in to augment the price. We asked the government to cost that initiative time and time again. This was a specific money bill. Similar to the questions we're hearing from the government today, we asked the government to cost that bill as to the cost per tonne, and they were unable to. They are still unable to say how much greenhouse gas emissions were saved as a result of the expenditure by the Canadian taxpayer. So clause 10 requires that the minister come forward and as best as possible delineate what's happened and delineate the projections forward.
If this had been in place with Canada's previous iterations of climate change plans, do you think we would be in a better situation right now if the government of the day had to report every year going forward to Canadians as to what's happened?