My experience is otherwise. I hear from major proponents all the time about how you miss your legislated timelines. As I said, when you miss by two months, you miss an entire construction season, so you miss by a year at that point in time. I will challenge the 99.7%.
Let me give an illustration of what we're talking about and what it means to the Canadian economy.
We had TMX. I know it's not a gas pipeline, but it's an oil pipeline, and the infrastructure is the same. TMX went from a $7.5-billion project to a $35-billion project. With that $35-billion project, supposedly the tolls of the shippers on the pipeline would have to pay for the extra capital. It was capped at around $21 billion or $22 billion. The excess of that was borne by the Canadian taxpayer at the end of the day, because you can't ship the oil.
It now costs less to ship by train than it does to ship by TMX pipeline, which is ridiculous. We can get to the northwest coast of B.C. at less cost per barrel than we can get along what's supposed to be an efficient pipeline. The issue of delays and the issue of extra costs incurred through your process jacked up the cost of the pipeline by five times.
There are going to be some times when you have excess costs going into the construction of a pipeline like that; let's acknowledge that, but five times is ridiculous. We'd like to find out exactly where that money went, through your organization, and who should bear the cost of that at the end of the day.
Can you help us in that respect, in finding out where that money went? It is indicative, for any proponent that's going to build a natural gas pipeline going forward, of what costs they'll to have to incur in building their financial case.