Thank you very much. I think that helps provide a bit of clarity to help anybody who might be listening to this debate to know what exactly it is that we are doing here.
One thing I find interesting about all of this is that it's actually a recommended practice in the big green book that we all have to not include a preamble on motions, the reason being that when there's a report tabled in the House of Commons, that gives you an opportunity to speak to whatever you would want to say that is relevant to it. It is actually, yes, a recommendation to not provide a preamble on motions for this very reason; therefore, we could avoid motions being politicized per se.
It also helps to make sure that there are accurate or real facts that are part of these motions when they get moved. I think it's important to note that the Alberta Energy Regulator, of course, would have been the natural place to go and look for the correct dataset and information on what the situation is like in the province of Alberta with abandoned and orphaned oil wells.
It's also worth noting that if you go to the Alberta Energy Regulator's website, there's a very thorough description of what an abandoned well is and what an orphaned well is. I think for certainty and clarity it is important to note that there is actually a very strict process that's already in place around what the process is for abandoning a well.
As a committee, we saw the minister's response from the province of Alberta. I'm just going to read from his statement from September 27 again.