It's resonating, because no Canadian government is going to tell you that they want to do something that is in clear contravention with NAFTA. But at the same time I know that it's probably the most difficult subject in terms of federal-provincial relations.
If a province--not naming any--says “I want the ethanol produced in my province, using the corn grown by my farmers, and if it's not that way you're not getting any subsidies”, and the subsidies are like 30¢ or 35¢ a litre, any Canadian government is going to have a fight on their hands unless they provide compensation, so we're back to how much money is going to flow from federal coffers to the various constituencies.
We think the danger there is that the kind of policy that Saskatchewan, for instance, has put forth not only creates trade issues between provinces and with NAFTA, but it creates also very small plants, which will not be competitive.
Co-op members are going to be competing with Archer Daniels Midland and with Cargill and with Suncor and with Husky, and maybe other oil companies. And the oil companies aren't going to build small plants. They're going to build plants that can be very efficient and export.
Encouraging a small farm co-op to build a small ethanol plant might make local political sense, but it's going to create long-term headaches for you. So it's resonating, but at the same time I see alarm bells going on, saying, whoops, politically difficult. And as to how you resolve that--good luck.