Then if the price of carbon is central, and the pricing mechanism we choose is important, should there be any analysis when government is setting out its spending priorities?
I noted that in the five things you talked to us about, most of them exist outside of federal powers. This committee will be charged with the task of making recommendations to government, directing the government in a certain way or another. On the spending side, that is one mechanism, and also on the price regime that we set up for a tonne of carbon.
Should an analysis or a filter be laid over top of what the government does in terms of spending, in an attempt to achieve greatest efficiency in spending costs per tonne of carbon reduced?
I want to give you an example. I sat on a committee last year, or about 16 to 18 months ago, in which the government was rolling out a significant package on biofuels. It was directed mostly toward corn ethanol. We attempted to move an amendment that said we should use biofuels that are of the greatest impact in terms of GHG reductions per thousand dollars. That amendment was rejected, and you know, I was confused by that.
How critical is it, for what we do into the future, to have that overlay assessment of what the cost per tonne is, of what the efforts of the government are in this?