Mr. Chair, many proposals have been made to expand Canada's infrastructure, among these, as I said, are the reversal of Enbridge line 9 and the possible conversion to natural gas/oil of one of the pipelines in the trans-Canada main line system, both of which would take oil to the east. The Keystone XL and Enbridge expansions would move oil south, and the proposed northern gateway and trans-mountain expansion would move Canadian oil to tidewater on the west coast. That said, independent regulators will conduct comprehensive, objective, scientific evaluations to determine whether any specific project passes regulatory muster and is safe for Canadians and for the environment.
The demand to move oil has clearly outstripped the capacity of the North American pipeline network, and as indicated, railways are filling some of this gap for now. However, there is no question that one of the safest and most reliable ways to move very large quantities of oil, as the minister pointed out, is through pipelines. With our plan for responsible resource development, our government has taken steps to enhance our pipeline safety. I know the line 9 reversal proposal is currently before our independent regulator, the National Energy Board, to review that.
Minister, we talked about the estimates for the NEB. Can you talk specifically about what expenditures are there to ensure pipelines are built that will adhere to a strict safety regime? With the NEB estimates and their responsibility for cradle to grave on the project reviews, is there any concern about the NEB being able to fulfill its mandate as a regulator?