Yes. I don't dispute that, and I don't want to belabour the differences we may have in terms of how one defines a subsidy or uses that term.
I think the key point we'd like to make is that it is a form of preferential treatment. We don't dispute that perhaps when it was established it was appropriate for the oil sands industry, given the economic benefit that does flow from oil sands.
I think we're now looking at it today and saying, in light of the significant changes that have occurred since that was introduced, is it still appropriate? Also, in light of the fact that it is factoring into the rate at which oil sands development is happening, might we take that tax base and shift it over towards other more beneficial things or areas of the energy sector that could now use that same sort of helping hand to develop those sectors further?
So it's not a question of whether or not it was ever appropriate; it's a question of whether it's still appropriate today, given that conditions have changed significantly in everything from the operating cost to the value of the commodity.
To give you another example within the Alberta context, when the Alberta royalty regime was established they did not estimate that the price of oil would ever exceed $35 a barrel, so that regime was established with that as a cap, and obviously times have changed.