Across every side of the House, there have been mills in ridings from every political party that have benefited tremendously from the pulp and paper green transformation program. I do want to make that clear. I don't think we should make it a political agenda.
The investments were targeted in a smarter way than in the U.S. program. I completely agree with that analysis. In fact, I continue to add my voice to that point.
By lowering energy, in the AV Nackawic example, but it happened all across this country, you're really supporting and giving an opportunity for a competitive position for these mills in the long run. So the report card is high.
Could we do more? Should we do more? Of course. We'll never say no to that. There is more opportunity. But if we had to capture opportunity, we would like to suggest that it should be in the form of that IFIT program, because it's tremendous.
By the way, it's applicable to sawmills as well as pulp mills. I think your question is extremely valid in that the pulp and paper green transformation program could not apply to sawmills. There is a gap. Part of our opportunity is to support further their transformation.
The number one finding from bio-pathways was that sawmills were the centre of the universe as it related to forestry economics. You want to do something for sawmills in the long term.