It's the reality that when the world adopted the targets.... Actually, this is why I was a bit confused when I was asked earlier about the green agenda. We're trying to push for a pragmatic agenda focused on economics, instead of trying to chase, for example, short-term emission reductions that can actually hurt our competitiveness. The pragmatic climate reset is about truly acknowledging that when the world said it was going to reduce emissions by 45% by 2030, it meant we had to accept that we were going to erase trillions of dollars in assets globally, and there was just no path for that.
Now the world is waking up to that reality. We can sign agreements. We can sign deals. I think there's actually an opportunity for Canada to be a global leader in this space—to acknowledge the challenge of net zero, carbon management and removing or reducing emissions.
It's not easy. It's not easy at all. I don't think we can just paint it as a rosy picture and pretend there aren't economic challenges that affect things like reliability and flexibility. This is why we really need to chart a path that focuses on conserving those things.
I presented why I think doubling the grid.... Right now, it's 82% clean. If we can get it to be 90% clean and it's double, I think most people would say that's a great thing. However, that would not have been permissible under the existing clean electricity regulations. The clean electricity regulations were designed for a 1.5x grid. We're talking about a 2x grid. Not only should the government revisit those regulations, as it has enunciated in its electricity strategy, but it has a duty to, given that the burden of proof for the cost to society has not been properly assessed, and given the level of ambition that was articulated in the strategy.
The pragmatic climate reset is really about trying to figure out what is going to intersect with our other priorities related to the economy and affordability, as well as, increasingly, the geopolitical priorities we have as a country.