Sure. Essentially, there is no single silver bullet, which is what makes it difficult. It requires efforts on the regulatory side of things. We need to streamline certain intransparent regulatory processes. Right now, for value-added projects, that lies with the provinces and we think that's where it should stay. There is certainly work to be done on that front.
We need certainty in terms of a competitive tax framework, which includes carbon pricing but also corporate tax and accelerated capital cost allowance. Also, the existence of incentives is a reality in the market these days, and there are ways of doing that. That's one example where governments have stepped up—particularly the Government of Alberta, but also the governments of Ontario and Quebec—and that has made a fairly significant difference in attracting these investments.
There's the necessity for infrastructure. Rail is particularly important, because these products can only be shipped out by rail. There are a lot of capacity issues, which I know will also be discussed later today, because we have a lot of demand on our rail system. In particular, if a pipeline does not get through, that's crude added on to the rail system as well.
Finally, there's a need for a skilled workforce, as many of our colleagues have said here today.
The municipal and provincial governments have aligned their policies and programs around attracting value-add energy investments, like petrochemical manufacturing and partial upgrading of oil. To be completely blunt, though, we need the federal government to quite openly make value-added energy processing a priority in Canada. We should be vocal about that.