The approach we've taken, I suppose, is one that is relatively pragmatic. It recognizes that we're dealing with a global commodity. We're dealing with something in which there's a significant amount of investment inertia. We're dealing with something that has the potential to create a lot of economic benefit, both within the private and the public sector. To try to stimulate a debate about whether or not oil sands development will proceed, in our judgment, is something that is not going to be a good use of our time.
Rather, we framed questions around how it occurs, both on the environmental side, in terms of having development occur within ecological capacity to sustain the environment over the period of development, and also by talking about whether Canadians and Albertans are maximizing the economic benefit in terms of public revenues and whether we can actually use that economic benefit to transition our economy away from things like the oil sands in a more accelerated manner, toward things such as fuel efficiency, energy conservation, and alternative, more sustainable, renewable forms of energy.
It really comes down to a matter that there is an opportunity here--it is happening--so let's set the proper parameters around how it happens. Right now we believe a moratorium is required so that we can actually set some of those parameters and make sure we have the right system in place before we go ahead with this rate of development that's currently proposed.