I'm on the record. What can I say?
We compliment the other chair on his hair more often, though, so.... That's an inside joke.
To the witnesses, thank you for being here today.
I'm going to change a little bit of the orientation of the questions and move to some of the other things. I don't get quite as overjoyed or excited as some of my colleagues do when people talk about reduction of greenhouse gases and things of that nature. There have been jokes that the only thing green I've ever had when I've come to committee has sometimes been my tie, and even that has been fairly rare. I tend to be a little bit more concerned about the bottom line, good capitalist that I am.
My underlying question--I'm playing the devil's advocate a little bit here--is that if this is such a good idea, all the integration and so forth, why would we as a federal government even need to push it? Shouldn't it be self-evident on a bottom-line basis for municipalities, developers, etc., to do an integrated energy system? Yes, it may take a little bit more capital, but at the end of the day, wouldn't it be more profitable for them? In terms of price signals, they'll take it from the market and go from there. Why should we give it a little more push?
As well, can you demonstrate to me that this is financially the best use of resources?
Both groups can take it away from there.