Good morning, everyone. I call this meeting to order.
Welcome to meeting number 45 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Natural Resources. The committee is meeting today to hear from the Minister of Natural Resources and officials.
Pursuant to Standing Order 81(5), we are considering supplementary estimates (B), 2022-23, including vote 1b under Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, vote 1b under the Canadian Energy Regulator, vote 1b under the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and votes 1b, 5b and 10b under the Department of Natural Resources.
Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. Now that we've started, screenshots and photos are not permitted.
For those joining online, when we get to officials and the minister, you'll need to unmute your mike when speaking. When you're not speaking, please mute it. If you want to raise your hand, please use the “raise hand” function. Interpretation is available, with floor, French or English as your choices. Finally, please address your comments through the chair.
Those are the formalities we needed to get through.
Just so that everybody knows, we have officials either in the room or online. Only one official has not yet done the technology check. We'll be keeping an eye open for when they join. We'll get to that when we switch out after the minister.
For the first hour, we have with us the Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson, Minister of Natural Resources.
Good morning, Minister. We'll give you the floor for a five-minute opening statement.
As always, I'll use my handy flash card system. Yellow means you have 30 seconds left. Red means your time is up, but don't stop mid-sentence.
When you're ready, Minister, I'll turn it over to you. I'll start the clock for your five-minute opening statement.
I am very pleased to be joining you today. I appreciate your invitation to talk about the investments this government is making to build a prosperous and clean future for the next generation, and to answer questions about the $315.9 million in expenditure requests contained in supplementary estimates (B), including $239.6 million for new funding or initiatives.
I am joining you today from the traditional, ancestral and unceded territories of the Squamish, Musqueam and Tsleil-Waututh nations.
Let me begin today by saying that I believe Canada is uniquely positioned to take advantage of the key growth areas that will be driven by the international transition to a clean future.
Around the world, financial markets are increasingly pricing climate risk into investment decisions. Smart money is flowing away from assets that are not compatible with a transition to a net-zero world and toward opportunities that are.
Just as any successful business must be capable of interpreting and reacting to changes in the business environment, countries must also be capable of thoughtful response and action if they are to sustain and enhance their level of prosperity. It is in this context that Canada can choose to be a leader in the global economic shift, or we can let it happen to us, with all the attendant consequences of being a late mover.
As the world moves toward a lower-carbon economy, a key question on which we must collectively focus is how to build on Canada's comparative advantages in a manner that will create jobs, economic opportunity and prosperity. My job, as I see it, is to work with folks across this country to determine how best to utilize the abundance of resources, technology and expertise that exist in this country, and pursue opportunities that will drive significant job creation and economic growth.
To remain competitive internationally, and to drive long-term economic growth, we need to think about economic opportunities at both sectoral and regional levels.
Opportunities from a sectoral perspective will come from new products that enable a low-carbon future, such as critical minerals, hydrogen, electric cars and buses, battery technology, renewable energy, low-carbon building products, small modular reactors and other clean technologies.
Regionally, each province has a relatively unique mix of its own natural resources. The economic opportunities available to them, and therefore the approaches to a clean energy transition, will be different across the country.
What we need is a plan based on comparative advantage, one that aligns the efforts and resources of all levels of government, as well as the private sector, and a plan that also respects the rights and interests of indigenous people. Such a plan must be thoughtful, collaborative and ambitious. It must create wealth and good jobs in every region of this country, while ensuring we achieve our ambitious and necessary climate goals.
I am working with the provinces and territories, as well as businesses and labour and indigenous partners, to establish regional energy and resource tables across the country, and to establish such a plan for each region of the country. Tables have now been set up with British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Manitoba, the Yukon, Northwest Territories, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Ontario. I look forward to soon establishing tables with Quebec, Saskatchewan, Nunavut and Alberta.
We are currently investing in the areas we know will be a part of Canada's clean energy future. Through the fall economic statement, we announced significant investments in our clean technology industries. Through investment tax credits in hydrogen and other clean technologies, we are maintaining competitiveness in the face of increasing global competition.
We also announced the creation of a sustainable jobs training centre to bring together employers, workers and institutions to help level up over 15,000 workers with the needed skills for building a prosperous low-carbon economy. This is in addition to investments to help create over 20,000 more union-based apprenticeships.
We are also investing directly in households. Recently, we announced new support for those who currently rely on home heating oil. The $250-million oil to heat pump affordability grant can often be stacked with the greener homes grant for up to $10,000 in direct support per family to transition away from heating oil and towards efficient, affordable and sustainable heat pumps. Heat pumps are a measure that reduce emissions and home heating bills, while doubling as a climate adaptation solution by providing air conditioning in increasingly hot summer months.
I could go on, but my time is almost up. I will conclude by saying that the measures included in the supplementary estimates (B) build on and enable many of these important initiatives. I welcome the opportunity to further discuss how my department is working across government to make life more affordable for Canadian families while fighting climate change, and building a truly sustainable economy that works for everyone.
Thank you very much for inviting me to join you today. I look forward to our conversation.
Sure. Thank you for the question.
Let me begin by thanking you for all the work you do on this file and your continued advocacy for your constituents. I know that it's very important in your riding.
The critical minerals centre of excellence at Natural Resources Canada leads the development and coordination of Canada's policies and programs on critical minerals, in collaboration with industry, provinces, territories, indigenous and non-governmental organizations, and international partners. The centre aims to advance critical mineral resources and value chains that are essential to the energy transition. This organization plays an important role in supporting the development of our strategy, which, as some of you will recall, we've been working on for a period of time and will be announcing very shortly.
One recommendation to establish this centre came out of this committee's report on critical minerals in June 2021. The centre will help prospective investors, mining operations and others who are part of the critical minerals value chain, such as clean tech, zero-emission vehicle facilities and electric battery manufacturers. Similar to the regional energy and resource tables that I noted earlier, the centre aims to navigate various regulatory environments to advance the use of Canada's critical minerals and to create a greener future for future generations.
Minister, I would like to go back to the question that my colleague, Ms. Stubbs, asked about Trans Mountain.
When I read the May 2022 statement made by the Minister of Finance, I understood that there would be no more government funding for Trans Mountain.
Earlier, you told my colleague that the $6 million will be redirected towards indigenous communities. To my mind, social acceptability and mitigation measures in response to legitimate complaints from indigenous communities are part of the risk.
If the department indicates in a statement that associated risks are mitigated and that no more government funding will be offered, then I don't understand what is going on with the $6 million. Can you please explain this?
I absolutely agree with you. Our problem is that we've missed every single target we've promised.
We are the only country in the G7 that continues to miss. Emissions grew 3% last year after the COVID drop. That is very concerning. Our environment commissioner, Jerry DeMarco, says that we are now the outlier in the G7, so it's not enough—I agree with you—to have nice targets. We have to meet them.
I want to switch tack in my final two minutes.
I was in Germany recently meeting with various officials about their energy crisis. They sent a very clear message to us. They said that if Canada can't supply LNG within two years, they're not interested in signing long-term contracts. They are interested in whether or not Canada has the potential to supply Germany's manufacturing sector with hydrogen.
Has your department looked into Canada's ability to supply hydrogen to Germany in the next two to three years?
Thank you very much for the question and thank you for the work you do each and every day in the beautiful province of Alberta.
Through the net-zero accelerator initiative and with the additional funding announced in budget 2021, we're investing $8 billion to accelerate the decarbonization of large emitting sectors. We're focusing on the transition to cleaner technologies across the piece. People often think this is primarily focused on the oil and gas sector. It is one area, but another area is steel manufacturing, where we have been working to implement electric arc furnaces.
We know this program is crucial to Canada's efforts to get to net zero and, through our global leadership, meet our ambitious GHG reduction targets. We announced $300 million just recently for the Air Products hydrogen facility in Edmonton. We also recently announced $27 million for E3 Lithium, which is a really interesting company extracting lithium from brines.
NRCan is the lead federal department on energy and natural resources. We play an essential role in the implementation of the net-zero accelerator.
The fight against climate change requires an all-hands-on-deck approach. The net-zero accelerator is a really clear example of how different departments can work together to help us achieve our goals.
I noticed that you said the word “green”. I really don't like the colours green, blue, purple or turquoise. I think we should be talking about carbon intensity, because carbon emissions are driving climate change.
In that context, I think Alberta has enormous opportunities with respect to hydrogen. It is the centre of renewable energy development in this country and has by far the fastest growth in renewable energy. That can be used to produce electricity, which can be used to produce hydrogen.
There are also pathways through which you can use natural gas resources. Alberta has an abundance to produce ultra-low-carbon hydrogen, assuming that you address upstream methane emissions and that you capture carbon through the production process.
We have developed a hydrogen strategy. We are focused very much on driving forward with hydrogen as a major opportunity for many parts of this country. We have MOUs with Germany, the European Union and the Netherlands. It certainly is an area of critical focus, and I would say it's an enormous area of opportunity for Alberta.
Mr. Chair, you and I attended OSCE meetings in the U.K. this summer, where food security, energy security and Russia's invasion of Ukraine were uppermost in the minds of the parliamentarians who were there.
Mr. Minister, although European politicians might have disagreed on the solutions, certainly the urgency was never questioned. To that end, my question relates to Canada's ability to engage globally in the quest to get ethically produced hydrocarbons to countries that are desperately seeking our natural resources.
It does seem as though we have more or less said that we won't worry about oil and gas, but we will take a push on some of the new technologies. Of course, since we've handcuffed ourselves, I don't think we have much of a choice.
There's also that nagging question of whether the and your ministry now recognize the business case for LNG to Europe and Asia. I know that was one thing that had been stated. There was no push-back from your government when the Biden administration arbitrarily cancelled Keystone XL, but now, of course, U.S. refineries are being filled with Venezuelan crude.
I'm trying to find out where you think Canada fits into this. I've read your mandate letter. I was on the environment committee before this, and I don't really see much difference between the mandate letter for environment and the mandate letter for natural resources. Perhaps I'll have to go to the industry mandate letter to see whether or not there's something that speaks to the actual strengths we have in the country.
Could you comment on where you feel we are at this point in time and how we're going to become the global player that we so proudly have been for decades?
I have spent an enormous amount of time with our European colleagues and in Europe. We have endeavoured to do everything we can to support them, including expanding oil and gas production this year by 300,000 barrels a day alongside our American friends doing likewise. We are on track to achieving that.
We certainly continue to look at the issue of exporting liquid natural gas to Germany from the east coast, but the economics are more challenging because of the distance. There are potentially ways to get around that, but the biggest barrier, as I said before, is the American regulatory system and the challenges there.
Canada has enormous opportunities to be a clean energy supplier to the world. That includes going through this transition of oil and gas and eventually hydrogen derived from oil and gas. We are very focused on that, but there is a fundamental underpinning there: To be relevant in the context of the transition that is going on, we need to be driving down emissions from the oil and gas sector. Just as with every other sector, this is in the economic interest of that sector, and if you talk to the Pathways Alliance folks, they would agree with that.
Welcome, Minister. If you are in beautiful North Vancouver, I'm not too sure if it's still snowing there, but I hope traffic has come back to normal.
Your testimony so far today has dealt with how Canada is uniquely positioned in the transition under way around the world in the global energy supply. In the last couple of days, we've seen the announcement that Qatar will be playing a strategic role in supplying LNG not only to Germany but to other countries. The German announcement is coming.
On that front, our relationship with Germany has been about hydrogen. I know you have spent a lot of time and a lot of resources on intellectually understanding hydrogen and how much of an opportunity it is for the Canadian economy.
I want to ask about the clean growth fund and other measures we have put in place. How can we as a country and as an economy benefit from our position in the production of hydrogen?
I think hydrogen is one of our opportunities. Many parts of this country have an opportunity to benefit not only from hydrogen derived from renewables through electrolysis, but also from hydrogen derived from natural gas in an ultra-low-carbon way.
There are many applications right now whereby people are using gas effectively to produce hydrogen in industrial processes. As for going straight to hydrogen, a massive market exists today, but a whole range of applications around heavy-duty trucking and home heating, and a range of other things, are going to use hydrogen as we move into the future.
We are working very actively with the Europeans, on the one hand, with respect to the east coast. We are also working very actively with the Japanese, the South Koreans and others on the west coast, because many of these economies do not have the ability to produce hydrogen themselves and are going to be looking for a stable, reliable partner like Canada.
It's a great question, Mr. Sorbara, and given your background, it's one that you would understand very well.
In the past, people have accused Canada of being the hewers of wood and the drawers of water. We have to ensure we're a lot smarter about how we utilize these kinds of resources going forward. Critical minerals are absolutely key to the energy transition. You cannot have an energy transition without significantly more critical minerals of various types. Canada has those resources in abundance.
We need to be focused on how we extract them in an environmentally sustainable way and in partnership with indigenous communities, and on how we build the processing facilities, the battery plants and the electric vehicle plants that are so important in Ontario. That is absolutely the work that and I have been focused on. As I said, within the next few days, I will be launching Canada's critical minerals strategy, which is a fundamental underpinning to this broader conversation.
In terms of the comparative advantage, you're exactly right that we can build on the existence of resources for a comparative advantage. However, this is also about the fact that Canada's grid is over 80% clean and emissions-free, so another reason for battery manufacturers and electric vehicle manufacturers to locate in Canada is to have products that produce almost zero carbon.
Thank you. I know that I was chastised by the minister, but I wanted to make that particular point.
One of the concerns that I have is this. Of course, there's money that has been set aside for indigenous discussions and so on in the supplementaries. Sadly, one thing we see is that many of our investors, who are the indigenous people of Canada, are just hitting their stride as far as engagement in oil and gas is concerned. That's where their history is. In the last 20 or 30 years, there's been amazing work done in that area. Whether it's oil and gas or whether it's mining in the territories, there are some amazing businesspeople and they're looking at opportunities, but it seems as though it's only going to be an opportunity if they follow the path of this government. That, I think, is perhaps a bit of a concern.
My concern is about the stranded assets that we might be anticipating as billions of dollars get put into projects and then, all of a sudden, the rug gets pulled out from under them.
I'll speak to indigenous companies. What do you see as a backstop for some of these indigenous companies that find that, after all of the efforts they've put in, there is no longer a market because we have chosen to go in a different direction?
Last week, I believe, we had Calvin Helin here, who is certainly a great advocate for his community. Basically, what he indicated was that they're tired of the eco-colonialism that is going on and different groups saying, “We know what is best for you. We're going to be there to help you. We're going to make sure you do it the right way, which is our way.” However, their expertise is saying, “Let's move forward. We know this is a global problem. We know this is a global concern. We are there with the skills to move it forward.”
There's always this other story that comes back to say, “Maybe we'll sell TMX to some indigenous group.” Unless you're going to sell it for $21 billion or whatever it happens to be when the final sum is there, there's going to be another group that says, “You just got through subsidizing this enterprise that has now bought TMX.” There's never an end, and that's the problem any time there is a government that decides it's going to get engaged in major projects like this. I'm concerned about what the future will be.
To go back to what I mentioned earlier to the minister, we see what is happening in Europe. We can always talk about how, yes, they would like to have some hydrogen and they would like to see us progress. The fact that we've cut ourselves off at the knees and we're not there to help them now...you can't undo that.
The Europeans' industry is falling apart. There are farmers who are being told, if they have three greenhouses, to pick which one they're going to keep. That's going to encourage a lot of difficult decisions—
I apologize. I should have introduced our officials who are with us.
Briefly, before we go into the next round of questions, we have with us in person, from Natural Resources Canada, Deputy Minister John Hannaford; Mollie Johnson, associate deputy minister; and Shirley Carruthers, chief financial officer and assistant deputy minister of the corporate management and services sector. Welcome.
Online today, we have Erin O'Brien, assistant deputy minister of the fuels sector; Debbie Scharf, assistant deputy minister of the energy systems sector; Jeff Labonté, assistant deputy minister of the lands and minerals sector; Glenn Hargrove, assistant deputy minister of the Canadian forest service; Drew Leyburne, assistant deputy minister of the energy efficiency and technology sector; Frank Des Rosiers, assistant deputy minister of the strategic policy and innovation sector; and, finally, Angie Bruce, assistant deputy minister of Nòkwewashk.
That is our panel today.
We're going to go now to Mr. Maloney, who will have five minutes for his questions.
Thank you to all the witnesses for being here.
I'm going to focus my questions on nuclear energy for the most part, but I'm going to start with the estimates, which, of course, are the reason we're here.
There are two components to the supplementary estimates (B) dealing with that. Area one is the $450,000 to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, and then there's a transfer of $4.9 million to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.
Can you just give us a brief overview of where this money is going to go and what organizations are going to benefit from it, for starters?
To take a step back, nuclear is very likely to be a pretty critical aspect of our energy mix as we are looking at an increase of demands on our electrical grid, perhaps two to three times the current demands by 2050. The government has taken a series of steps to support the development of this technology.
You mentioned the support to the CNSC. That is in part to reinforce the centrality of the commission as a world-class regulatory body. One of the great assets we have right now is recognized expertise with respect to not only the technology, but also the regulatory environment, which is critical, obviously, to the safety and operation of these facilities.
The government has also, though, taken steps to announce support for, principally, small modular reactor technologies in the last period of time. The Canada Infrastructure Bank is supporting the development of the Darlington site, where some $900 million has been put toward a 300-megawatt demonstration operation of SMR technology. There's also support that's being provided more generally to CNSC. There was a $50-million announcement with respect to the support of our regulatory regime, which will go to CNSC in order to develop some of the regulatory tools that will be necessary to ensure the safe operation of the technology. In addition, we've been investing through the strategic innovation fund to support specific applications.
Okay, great. Thank you.
We heard the say, “Canada has enormous opportunities to be the clean energy supplier to the world”, and this is obviously one of those areas.
I'm going to move on to another aspect of nuclear energy, and that's in the health field.
In my riding, I have an organization called Kinectrics, which is in partnership with Bruce Power and a French company working on medical isotopes. It's done through the CANDU nuclear process. I went down and visited Bruce Power this summer. It's a private sector initiative, but it needs a little nudge and support from the governments, and I think the federal government has stepped up on that.
Maybe you can use that as an example, but can you give us other examples where the federal government has helped the private sector push that ball down the field?
The deputy is right. We have been a key player in this field in the past. Right now we work internationally with other partners to maintain the supply chain for the types of isotopes we need in Canada for use in cancer treatment, sterilizing medical devices, diagnostic procedures, the treatment of food and consumer products. The lead for maintaining that supply chain in Canada is the Department of Health, or Health Canada, at the federal level, making sure that the isotope supply is available to all who need it for all of those applications.
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, the CNSC, does play a role in licensing, as part of their regulatory functions, for the types of reactors that could produce isotopes if it was something Canada wanted to do again.
You are absolutely right. ISED does have, through its strategic innovation fund, the ability to fund R and D and commercialization, which could include a variety of different areas, including nuclear innovations.
Those are some of the things—
Mr. Hannaford, I don't know if you know this, but it's very difficult for the forestry sector to receive assistance from the federal government. The only economic arm is Canada Economic Development, and it cannot support forestry companies that are engaged in primary or secondary processing. Their requests are automatically transferred to Global Affairs Canada, which systematically refuses them because of trade disputes with the United States.
The forestry industry's only lever is the famous investments in forest industry transformation program, which is underfunded, according to all the stakeholders I consulted. Many people even tell us that they don't apply to this program because they know it will be rejected.
Do you have any data on the number of applications that are made under this program, the number that are accepted and the number that are refused?
It's very clear, with the United States going into high gear in terms of a clean-tech economy, that it puts a lot of pressure on Canada. We have to have, at every level, a real, coherent strategy and collaboration. At the federal level, NRCan has to deal internationally, but then you have to deal with all the different provinces and their various political focuses.
I want to focus on that, because this morning in the news, one of the top stories was about the launch of a Calgary clean-tech program, and they said that the only thing people were talking about in Calgary at this clean-tech launch was the uncertainty caused by Danielle Smith and her sovereignty act and that it was threatening to scare business out of Alberta.
Deborah Yedlin, who's president of the Calgary Chamber of Commerce, said there was no shred of evidence that this act will lead to economic growth. She said, “We see this as potentially introducing a very significant element of risk and uncertainty for businesses in Alberta.”
I certainly don't want to have you comment on the political machinations of Premier Smith, but I would ask you how important it is for the federal government working with the various provinces, if we're going to try to supply clean tech and compete with the Americans, that we do this in a framework of a shared goal, shared values and a shared vision?
I want to follow up on some of the different questions we had about methane a bit earlier today.
I was excited that just about a month ago one of our Canadian satellite companies, which is tracking methane leaks from space using satellite technology, was able to participate through COP27 in highlighting methane leaks around the world. They found some from coal plants, for example, but they also found one from a waste treatment plant in Terrebonne, back in November. It's a company called GHGSat. They're based in Montreal. I think they show how some of the cutting-edge technologies that we're developing here in Canada are helping to track down methane, and from different sources than people might normally think of as sources of methane.
When I was looking through the supplementary estimates (B), I saw that there was funding for Canadian data-receiving infrastructure for the space-based earth observation network. I was just wondering if maybe, thinking about that piece of funding, you can highlight some of the Canadian technologies that we're helping to support and develop on methane emissions.
This is an area that NRCan has been very active on in recent years, working with partners around the federal family, the National Research Council and others.
As you know, there are a number of different materials that we consider when we talk about green buildings. One is engineered wood products, and obviously NRCan has a deep interest in that. My colleague Glenn Hargrove could probably speak to that.
We do know that the embedded carbon in the materials we build these buildings with is a crucial part of getting to net zero. It's not just the heating systems, the appliances and the other things that consume energy; it's also the carbon that's baked into the way we build and dispose of buildings over time.
We have work happening in the CanmetENERGY labs to look at building envelopes and materials and how they can be reduced. We also recently announced that we would be working on a low-carbon building materials innovation hub, working across the federal family to push this science even further.
Thank you. I'd be happy to.
You'll also notice that there's the green construction through wood program, which was originally announced in budget 2017 under the pan-Canadian framework on climate change. This program aims at reducing the carbon footprint of construction in Canada and increasing the use of wood in non-traditional construction applications.
To date, that program is committed to supporting 16 demonstration projects. These include things like high-rise buildings and low-rise non-residential buildings, timber bridges, and those sorts of non-traditional uses. An example would be the 10-storey Limberlost Place, a tall wood building at George Brown College. There are three mass timber buildings on the campus of the Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, which will be the first nuclear campus to use wood as a structural building material.
These sorts of initiatives really help to increase the use of wood in these non-traditional applications and thereby also reduce the embodied carbon in buildings, as Drew alluded to.
I'm going to have to jump in here. We're out of time.
I would like to thank all of the officials for joining us, both in person and online today.
Before we let you go, I do have one question for the members.
We are going to be voting momentarily on the supplementary estimates (B). Some items were asked for from officials during the course of the meeting today. Because we'll be voting, the information would be for information only. The question is, do you still want our clerk to follow up with the items that were requested to be sent back and circulated?
Okay, we'll follow up with officials for the items that were requested.
If you could get that information back to us as quickly as you can, that would be helpful. Ideally, we'd like to have it back before we break for Christmas. Getting it translated and circulated would be really helpful.
Thank you to all of you for being here and for joining us today. If you'd like to leave the in-person meeting or drop off from online, you're more than welcome to do that.
For the members, we'll now have a vote on the estimates.
ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED
Vote 1b—Payments to the corporation for operating and capital expenditures..........$151,471,268
(Vote 1b agreed to on division)
CANADIAN ENERGY REGULATOR
Vote 1b—Program expenditures..........$2,924,280
(Vote 1b agreed to on division)
CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION
Vote 1b—Program expenditures..........$5,696,447
(Vote 1b agreed to on division)
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Vote 1b—Operating expenditures..........$45,989,393
Vote 5b—Capital expenditures..........$5,001,000
Vote 10b—Grants and contributions..........$253,402,069
(Votes 1b, 5b and 10b agreed to on division)
The Chair: Shall I report the votes on the supplementary estimates (B), 2022-23 to the House?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: Okay, we're good.
With that, folks, we've concluded today's study of supplementary estimates (B), 2022-23.
Right now, we're scheduled to have our next meeting on December 6, to start reviewing the draft report for the study of creating a fair and equitable Canadian energy transformation, if it can be distributed with sufficient time for members to review beforehand. I'll be looking to see if we have it tomorrow or if we can get it out first thing on Monday. If it's beyond noon on Monday, then we'll likely have to cancel the Tuesday meeting. We'll see how quickly we can get it to you. Watch for the notice of meeting that we'll get out at some point on Monday and watch for the draft report.
I look forward to seeing everybody. Have a safe weekend.
With that, the meeting is adjourned.