Although we're not yet finished the work on our road map, where we're taking a year to think through all of the policies, programs, and measures that the federal government can put into place, I'll leap ahead and say, just from listening to the comments here, that I think we need to continue the work we do in three areas--in R and D, in policy, and in programs.
Certainly R and D is needed to continue to deliver the technologies that will drive the savings. As Kevin says, it doesn't really matter what technology; a lot of technologies are available that can be combined for an integrated community approach.
The policy work is kind of important and often overlooked. Ken Ogilvie was talking earlier about capacity and tools, and the ability to put those together. I really see that as a federal government role. Actually, I could come back to Mr. Cullen's question, about being able to demonstrate the effect of the federal government. I see that as a very obvious role for the federal government, to provide a common tool that then can be used at different levels and in different communities, large and small, maybe to provide a variety of different tools--for instance, some that are more useful for remote or rural regions, or for the north, or for larger-density cities.
So I see a number of roles that the federal government can take. But I won't be fully informed until we take our thinking a little further along the quest here, if you will.