Listen, I think one of the things I'm hearing here is a sense of distrust, and there's a reasonable reason for some of that. When I think of the investments that our sector has proposed in battery chemicals in Quebec, for instance, every one of the projects has been supported by the federal government. When I think of the automotive investments in Ontario, every major project has been supported by the Government of Canada.
Alberta has set a strategy. We've tried for seven years to get the federal government to go back to the work that Gil's team did under the NDP six years ago now. We tried to get the federal government to understand that this is in everybody's interests and that it has broad-based support. The answer largely has been, “We'll look at opportunities on a case-by-case basis, but don't hold your breath”, so I can understand why the distrust is there.
Look, we have an organization called “PrairiesCan”. They spend money. They set priorities. This is a chance for Parliament to have a deeper dive into the long-term direction of that activity. Where should we be spending money?
The question was, “Shouldn't this bill apply everywhere?” Well, we have economic development agencies everywhere. I would just say that I think there's a bigger disconnect between the Government of Canada, PrairiesCan and the priorities of the Province of Alberta in particular—if not Saskatchewan—than we would see in other parts of the country. It's not for me to say “consultation”, but that's the opportunity this bill provides. It's to better align what the province has already done through successive governments to set low-carbon priorities, diversify the economy and create new industries, and to get Ottawa to understand that and consider it on an equal footing, as it does with battery chemicals in Quebec and the e-transformation of the automotive sector in Ontario. That's the opportunity here today.