To clarify, I was specifically talking about the northwest coast pipeline being championed by the Alberta government. The only reason I say that is.... There are two factors.
One, our current track record on building west coast pipeline capacity is very mixed and very expensive. Even the Trans Mountain pipeline, as it currently exists in its expanded form, is not covering the full cost of construction with tolls. If the tolls were to cover the full cost of construction, they would be distortionary and ruinous to the overall structural value of western Canadian oil production in barrels. The same thing would happen, I think, if you structurally acquired a new million-barrels-a-day pipeline capacity to the west coast. It would cost $30 billion or $40 billion.
My point is, mostly, that the competing egress that is largely southbound, the Enbridge Mainline expansion pipeline, is going to be notably cheaper. For many of the reasons Peter discussed, it's easier to build pipelines and this stuff in the United States. This is why, historically, so much of our oil export, structurally, has gone there.
There is a tendency to say, “That's our mistake.” However, it's economics. It's the gravity theory of trade. It makes a lot of sense, but it has introduced vulnerabilities and precarities into our system. From a strategic perspective, we want diversity, but the economics naturally concentrate. It made a lot of sense, for a long time, for our exports to do that, but it has introduced vulnerabilities that we now have to deal with and that were brought home to bear last year, harshly.