Thank you, Mr. Chair. To this motion here, I am of the opinion that, if you are going to make an attractive investment environment for players such as the oil and gas community, which have 100 times more the budget that we operate in 12 months, you are going to have to make it regulatorily attractive. Yet, on the hand of balance, ensuring that there is protection for our pristine environment and having experienced many projects within this sector, I am of the opinion that it is not only in our best interest that the developer acknowledges the terms and conditions of the licence issued as well as the daily operations of their land-use permit conditions, as well.
It is in their best interest to run a clean operation in order to maintain shareholder fairness to the increasing dividends that they are in business to produce. This and the other previous motions, I am hesitant to see the rationale behind, in my opinion, I am assuming that are putting barriers to trying to attract development players. Given that balance approach, I am confident that the department has taken this legislation seriously on the road, developing what they heard, as well as committee's chores or committee's efforts in doing their due diligence, as well.
We come to an accommodation here where we see to mitigate what we see as fair to the environment, to the people, and to outside industry. We're seeing benefits from industry as we speak. Having to create barriers in terms of additions, it may sound like it is minimal, but the words of legislation have large impacts on certainty and uncertainty. There is elsewhere for players to invest their proceeds. In today's world, I think there are faster returns elsewhere in more moderate weather conditions. I just want to point that out here. I am not in favour of this motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair.