My question is for Mr. Van der Put.
Representatives from TransCanada have said many times, both in relation to Keystone but also here in Canada with reference to energy east, that pipelines don't lead to greenhouse gas pollution. The argument is that the oil is coming out of the ground anyway, so pipelines don't spur new oil sands development.
Whether I agree or not with that argument, that is the argument, but if that is the case, then when TransCanada is building a picture of the economic benefits of a pipeline, the benefits that TransCanada lists go well beyond the actual operation and construction of the pipeline, so I see a contradiction there. How do you resolve that contradiction?