We hear from companies all the time, and both orders of government, in terms of the regulatory aspect. In terms of compliance costs, I saw a study out of the United States that showed that in some cases, 20% or 25% of the costs of a project can be tied to compliance. If we as a country want to be competitive, and we reduce our compliance costs as a proportion of the costs of a project to move it forward.....
We don't control the price of markets and we don't control the price of gold or iron ore, but we can control within our own regulatory system, where we can, greater efficiency, or at least we can strive for that. In the review of the environmental assessment work that went on over the summer and the call for consultations with respect to that, we would certainly support and look for, as MAC and others have said, transparency, greater certainty, and greater capacity within the federal system to respond to projects and to provide companies with that sort of thing. If we have a window of opportunity to get investment for a project and to advance it, and we miss that window of opportunity because market conditions change or other things come across, then we lose that opportunity. Let's try to keep a line out there.