I would say it's part of the reason for hearings like this: for you to hear a variety of different inputs and for you to be able to make your best informed judgments; to synthesize what I say, which I hope you all take as an absolutely neutral, agnostic, best public interest view, bearing in mind economic sustainability as well as environmental sustainability as a balance that must be achieved. You'll certainly hear from industry people who will argue, I'm sure, a little bit more to one side, and you'll hear from environmentalists who will argue very much toward another side.
I would ask you to question particularly the environmentalists on the practicality of the alternatives they offer. The point is that it's all very well to say we should slow down and stop development of the oil sands, but do you want Canada to become a net oil importer? If you do, what are we going to pay for that oil with, and what sacrifices are we going to be making in our hospitals and our schools, on day care payments, and so on and so forth, in order to pay for that imported oil? It's a delicate balance. There aren't any simple answers, but I can tell you that if we do not develop the oil sands and continue to develop them at a strongly measured pace while, as I said before, introducing technology on every level and providing incentives or encouragement to the private sector to do that, I think we risk losing any kind of position of being an oil exporter. You can see that just from the graphs.