Thank you for that question.
In fact in our forward-looking analysis and our long-range planning, we do put in a price for carbon. Part of it is the reality that, as Mr. Leach mentioned, in Alberta there actually is a price on carbon and we've already paid into the large emitter fund since it came into effect. That's part of it. That's real. We think that's a relevant and important thing. Certainly Alberta is the first jurisdiction to do that. We thought that was very forward thinking.
The second is that obviously through the last year there was a lot of discussion around the oil and gas regulations. While they certainly appear to be on hold at the moment, we think it's relevant and important that Canada, when it's the right time and at the right place, actually proceed with that, working with the rest of the globe and the other countries.
We just think it's so real that it's important for us and for our board and our shareholders to see we're accepting that reality.
I think more importantly, it's really to the subject of social licence. It's been a curious thing as part of the oil sands business as we look at the amount of focus on carbon and emissions with the oil sands. There are a number of people out there who genuinely believe that the climate change issue, which is real and legitimate, would actually stop if we shut down the oil sands. The global contribution is very small, but certainly it is the largest growing sector in Canada, and so as a country we have to address it.
When we consider it, interestingly enough it is one of a number of areas that we look at in terms of our long-term plan, in terms of social licence. For us it's a combination. If you actually ask local stakeholders, the Athabasca River is a fundamentally important river to the region. Its health is, I would say, as critical to local stakeholders as emissions. Certainly aboriginal business and employment and community health are also part of the social licence, so we have a broad look at it. Carbon is just one element to it.