Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Obviously, the new costing came out and although we were expecting an increase in the price of this project, we were surprised by the magnitude of the increase: $16 billion. I think the suspected or the whisper number on the street had been, sort of, in the 10 to 12 range. So this is much higher than we had anticipated. We've been lobbying for some time; we do believe that there is a logical role for governments in assisting this project. We've never been advocating that there be subsidies paid to the producers; we don't think that makes sense or is the role of government, but we do believe that there are some areas governments can help. The Tristone report points those out. Whether it's infrastructure investments that could bring down the price of this project, we know it would be cheaper to construct in the South because of our infrastructure disadvantage. So marine infrastructure, road infrastructure, airports; there are some things that can be done. Assistance to the APG is another area that we would like to see happen in the form of loan guarantees, Mr. Speaker, potentially some shipping commitment help. So there are a number of areas we see a logical role for governments. Thank you.
Brendan Bell on Question 57-15(6): Mackenzie Gas Pipeline Legacy Infrastructure Projects
In the Legislative Assembly on May 11th, 2007. See this statement in context.
Return To Question 57-15(6): Mackenzie Gas Pipeline Legacy Infrastructure Projects
Question 57-15(6): Mackenzie Gas Pipeline Legacy Infrastructure Projects
Item 7: Oral Questions
May 10th, 2007
Page 124
See context to find out what was said next.