Environment committee  The 10% was not based on a study. There are a couple of points. First, the PBO report continues to confirm that the average Canadian who receives—

Environment committee  No, the 10% is a top-up to what other Canadians receive. We've done studies on the impact of carbon pricing in the territories. We commissioned a study on the impact of carbon pricing in indigenous communities and the RIAS that we prepared—

Environment committee  I'm trying to answer your question, sir. The RIAS—

Environment committee  No, not to determine the 10%.

Environment committee  That's correct. The RIAS we did for the output-based pricing does include an analysis of impacts on rural Canadians.

Environment committee  The clean fuel standard is very much inspired by and based on the clean fuel standards that have been developed in other jurisdictions. We have developed a refined life-cycle analysis tool that is specific to Canadian circumstances and that is based on best practices globally.

Environment committee  The current regulations are intended as an initial step, so we are looking very closely at the recommendations from the University of Victoria and others about ways in which the regulatory regime for single-use plastics should be expanded in the future.

Environment committee  Perhaps I could ask what you mean by “negotiable”.

Environment committee  Sorry, there's a big echo. I wonder if somebody's not on mute.

Environment committee  Okay, the echo is gone. The 2026 that I think you're referring to is our commitment to do an interim review of the new benchmark criteria. We don't plan to do that earlier than 2026. We plan to start it well before 2026, but the idea would be to.... We've established criteria

Environment committee  Can I just respond to that? The audit also acknowledges, however, that we have strengthened the benchmark criteria. What I'm referring to are the new benchmark criteria for 2023 to 2030 that were put in place after the audit was concluded.

Environment committee  Perhaps I could start, Mr. Chair. Without getting into all the details that are provided in the “2030 Emissions Reduction Plan”, I think the key point is that it represents the current plan and it does indeed take some steps to address at least some of the recommendations made b

Environment committee  Maybe I can start the answer. The gap arises in a lot of circumstances, in that when measures are developed, it's generally possible to develop a very rudimentary assessment of the likely emission reductions associated with a measure. That initial assessment is very different fr

Environment committee  No, that's not the answer. I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. The reason is that measures are interactive. You cannot simply add one to another. What we do is discount the interactive effect and look at only the additional impact, and that's why there are different numbers.

Environment committee  I'm not sure I would characterize the issue as a loophole. As our associate deputy minister explained, the goal of the clean fuel regulation is to reduce the life-cycle intensity of fuel. If we reduce the carbon intensity of the production of fuel in Canada, regardless of where