Thank you for the question.
The larger context questions like you're posing right now are important ones, because we can sometimes look at the details of particular programs and then forget that there are underlying challenges present that are very difficult to crack. This is my second hearing this morning where we've been talking about the need for a long-term approach to these issues.
I would say that it's critical—and I don't think Mr. Cosbey used this term—to have social licence for the activities that are going to change people's lives, their livelihoods and their incomes. There needs to be buy-in and that's why education is important. It's actually one of the lessons in our lessons learned report.
If there isn't support for measures, not just among government actors negotiating but amongst the population, the measures will not last. We had the discussion already about the consumer carbon price coming in and then going. I would say that the federal government needs to take the lead and try to encourage a collaborative approach, but should do so in a way that doesn't give the impression that it will do nothing in the absence of consensus. There needs to be some sort of backstop or baseline so that those who are negotiating with the federal government know that there are consequences if we don't reach an agreement.
In negotiation talk, what's our best alternative to a negotiated agreement? In this case, the federal government may come in and do things that the province doesn't want to happen. This is part of the challenge of Canada in a federal state—in addition to the municipal and indigenous governments as well—but it's not something that's impossible to overcome.