Mr. Chairman, I would be loath to comment on matters that are of particular concern to my colleagues in the upstream oil and gas industry, and I suspect my colleagues might feel the same. But perhaps more generally, I think there are two points to think about here that are of general application.
One, as the economy grows, as the population grows, it tends to put pressure on greenhouse gas emissions, and that's true right across the board. As the commercial sector grows, it will use more energy. In fact, it's the fastest growing part of the energy system, and it therefore will put more pressure on greenhouse gas emissions. That's true right across the board, whether it's residential, commercial, or any other.
The question for Canada is whether Canada believes it's in its interest to continue to be a big energy producer, to enjoy the benefits, the jobs, the investment, and the export dollars that come from doing that. That's a question of policy, and I think probably a lot of us, certainly at this end of the table, would agree that's probably a positive policy. There are inevitably consequences with respect to greenhouse gas emissions as a consequence of that.
On the polluter pay principle, at a general level, I think most people would agree that when you're talking about a polluter—in other words, somebody who is creating environmental emissions but has a mitigation technology available to them. Then under some measure of controls, usually regulation, it's entirely appropriate that those costs should be internalized by the investor. To that extent, I think most people would agree that polluter pay makes a lot of sense.