Quo. When the secretary of state and our minister of Foreign Affairs met and had a press conference, they talked about both Climate Change and energy security. We talked about vehicle emissions standards. Th minister talked about the action weve taken had the the United States on coal plants in canada. I closed down some coal plants. I thought it was good for our jurisdiction but i think Energy Efficiency is crucial. Energyefficient homes, buildings, cars, trucks. Those are issues of aerospace and how to remake steps in that direction. I feel confident both canada and United States will achieve this copenhagen charter and achieve Energy Independence in north america by 2020. That is great for this neighborhood. What is the effect on the canadau. S. Relationship if the project is turned down . I dont think canadians will be impressed if the project is turned down. If it will do something to reduce greenhouse emissions in the United States, maybe you could make the argument. In terms of jobs estimates, we know 4,000 people today are working on the southern portion of the key xl project. So i will say more than 4000 will work on the upper portions. Alberta has reduced its Carbon Intensity and emissions since 1990. Industry is being driven to make improvements in technology in the way they use water and the way they get the oil out of the sand. It is not all about mining anymore. Its not enough, i am not apologizing for the carbon and tensity but you have to look accrued coming out of bakersfield, california. How does that relate to crude coming out of alberta . Canadians would not be happy if the keystone is turned down, just as if it would not be happy if we have renewal will portfolio standards that do not recognize clean hybrid. Keystone is the first option that first option to get the crude to the refineries. That does not mean it is the only option for canadians. There are least two pipelines to the west being looked at. There is one west east project. The market will determine how this goes. If we make the mistake of not doing this project, the oil will get to other places. Where it will be refined in an environmental situation where it will be burned in cars that did not have anything close to the u. S. Canada standards. We all listen to the president s state of the ness address any talk about taking action on Climate Change if the congress did not act. State of the Union Address and talk about taking action on Climate Change if the congress did not act. Obviously he is thinking about things other than the keystone. A lot of people have been watching. I think canadians would like to that agreement happen as well but has not. It has been a real frustration. As a result, we are not expecting congress to come up with an agreement. There has been a focus on what can president obama do . Keystone is not the only thing were talking about in the United States. There has been new regulation proposed. That will be where we can make an executive order happened urate also the executive opportunity does extend to keystone. The president has an opportunity there. Looking at existing Carbon Pollution and United States, we have to tackle that. We look at keystone as future carbon emissions. The opportunity here is for the country to work on their climate target together. This should not be a finger pointing exercise. Can canada and the United States meet their targets . I think canada has further to go but that can be done. The canadian government has said theyre going to come out with regulations for the oil and gas sector. We are waiting to see what they are. If they came out with strong regulations that would meet those targets, what groups like yours say that is great . Would it make any difference to the opposition to this project . We are interested in time a policy and the canada. We are very interested in those regulations and we will look closely. With all due respect to the ambassador, we do not view those kohl regulations as strong. Coal regulations as strong. As not very strong. What we would like to see is some strong regulations around the oil sector. That would be very useful. We are looking at the u. S. Focus, not just the canadian focus. There is a fantastic quote in the setup video i think the americans know how serious we are on Climate Change. The americans have noted that they were less stringent than the canadian industry have asked for. The Natural Resources minister said in the event the americans bring in a carbon tax, we will not. Canadian policy on Climate Change has been to take whatever policy obama can get through congress. It was smart because as it turned out, he has not been able to get much through. In the past few months, the industry has indicated it will no longer take american policy on Climate Change. They have signaled we are willing to grab the competitive advantage that comes from having a dirtier Energy Sector the than the americans. Those are characterizations that are easily disputed. I want to go back to the oil sands. When canada began developing them in the late 1960s, there was no way you could do without economic. This has been from the very beginning a very expensive project around research and innovation to get from the point you could extract the substance and refine it and sell it at a reasonably competitive price. At the same time, the emissions that are being caused by that are going down sharply. You now have with the most recent projects, a product that is on par with what is being produced in conventional sources. To pretend it is somehow a static element and is really dirty. Nobody is turning themselves to the white house fence about oil coming out of california. You have to put it in that broad context. There is no country on earth have in the resource that canada has, that would fail to develop it. We cannot carry be needed. We need the jobs that come from it, the revenue. We can look as rationally. Not because we are making it impossible for one preferred source to produce but were finding ways to technology and to price signals. Alberta has a carbon tax which is a current market rate about twice what it is in europe. We have to figure out how we do this together. The real challenge to prosperity and jobs in north america as not competing between us war among ourselves. Its looking around the world and say how we build a competitive base in north america . To pick up on those points, i totally agree that is a resource that no government can walk away from and say we will forgo this. You are seeing the pressure being greeted by the price differentials. That means government has returned to its Major Research to be able to start seeing if they can make up the difference. That pressure will keep growing. I do think the idea is we need to focus on the demand side and pushed the efficiency standards. Not just in north america. We are working pretty hard at this. It takes a long time to turn over the stock. We also have to look globally. That is where the u. S. And canada can be working together. The demand for the future is in asia. That is where, if we become Energy Independent, it is not just producing more but we are consuming less. Ive heard my bosses tell me that is what we need to be. We have to recognize is that global drive. Climate change is a global problem. We need to focus on where we can have the greatest impact. What is the timeline for getting if we look at it in the context of some of the commentary coming from the United States, if you were to move forward on the regulations for the big emmitters. What is the timeline . Is it let the between now and maybe june . Is it likely to happen between now and june . You hear a lot of different reports about when the u. S. Will make its decision on the keystone. It will be 90120 days after the draft eis is issued by the state department. It was not issued today. You can make some calculations on timing. Ive heard first quarter, second, third, fourth. I know they work very hard on getting the coal regulations. It will in essence close down every plant in canada. Most coal plants will be gone in canada. I think theyre working very hard on it. 2011, the state Department Reports on ghgs relative to american ghgs. Had it at 17 . The latest numbers have it between 9 and 11 on average, lower the california thermal. Comparable to venezuelan crude it is replacing. It was 10 to 1 20 years ago. The new technology is half a barrel to 1. Ethanol is 3 barrels to 1 and thats a very important distinction between oil sands, which is half a barrel of water to 1 with the new technology. Whats happening with our discussion tonight is what often happens in canadau. S. Relations. We tend to view a whole thing through a natural lens. Narrow lens. Theres so much muscle memory in the relationship that goes beyond this particular one project. In the days of the lumber wars, we got obsessed with lumber. The truth of the matter is, the relationship is pretty good. It is pretty gigantic. I think there are opportunities that we can look at. Canada and the United States are both looking at how we do business in asia. If the fda was abiding and nasa if the fds was the wdeedding and nasa was a honeymoon, we might have a second honeymoon. It is all the needs of upgrading. It might be the way to do that. There might be ways to get some procurement deals. I didnt that there is a lot more to the relationship, including the way we deal with the relationship with the rest of the world. We have not talked about Everything Else we do around the world together in some of the troubled spots. There are real values that we share. In the context, we in canada there is a need to be a closer relationship between the Prime Minister and the president. We will move the conversation along, but this pipeline decision lies with the president. It will be something canadians can look to and say, he said no. I want to get a sense on how significant a dent that could put in the relationship if president obama says no to the keystone. I think it depends on how it is managed between the two leaders. This is a case in which the Prime Minister believes this is an important issue for canada. It was understandable in the context of the runup to the president ial Election Campaign the last time that he was saying no and there were other issues that were more of a local nature as well at the site, it could be accepted as something that was more in the nature of the delay and a flatout refusal. I think it will be meaningful. It will be important how it is explained if the answer is no. What is the justification . What is the reality that is perceived to come out of it . If their reasons are that will be found unacceptable and that would be a problem. In talking to canadian politicians, there are some things out of joint. A lot of it has to do with the suggestion that if canada were to do more on the Climate Change front, this might help us. Canadian politicians are running around now that there is Greenhouse Gas admission in the air. They are going to great length to point that out. Who is a real climate laggard if the u. S. Is not serious on getting on this. That is the point. Language is important. It can be a real problem. That relativity will be pointed to. Given the breath of things, the things that we need to do together and the issues we need to tackle together has a common view. That ranges from Foreign Affairs to our common economic future. It would be unhelpful if this was more than just a bump in the road that became something that pushed us off the road. I think danielle wanted to jump in. Before that, i get a sense of your questions in the audience. I see some hands. Ok. If you change your mind and more want to ask, i will get to that depending on how much time is reserved. The decision around the keystone is not necessarily lateral. Who will be point our finger at if the president makes a decision we do not like . Canada has played a role in the whole debate. It is a conversation between two countries. If canada sits back and says we need to do a better job of a filing that environmental progress, that is a big question. Certain the Climate Policy issues are perceived widely. Canada has some of the weakest time it policies of many industrializations. I think canada has a role to play to step up and do something. That may play a decision to turn around and say if president obama makes a decision then we will be unhappy, i think that is a narrow view on the matter. When the Prime Minister and the president got together two weeks ago, they were talking about the discussion of how to keep the world safe for. We are talking about iran and the development of the nuclear capacity. Theyre talking about the situation in syria and where things are going. Were talking about libya. Before and after the mission. We are talking about afghanistan. How can we move it to a place where soldiers are there moving from combat to training but by the Afghan People . We are talking of issues of north korea. We spent 10 of our agenda on this. Were talking about how to improve be on the border and improve Regulatory Reform. A lot of what the two leaders do is talking about lifeanddeath situations in our neighborhoods and in the world. The media ask about the most immediate stories keystone and Regulatory Reform perhaps. That is not necessarily what takes up most of their time when they have their meetings in the oval office or in the state department building. Scott, do you want to jump in and then louise has a question. There are state visits. President ial scholars look at who has the state visits. There were india, china, mexico, korea, germany. It would be a spectacular thing for canada and u. S. Relations if the two agreed to host reciprocal states. One year it could have them come here and spent time with obamas then the next year they would go up there. It is symbolic. It is like in canada that where host the royals. You also remember your history and Pay Attention to the way we have not had one since 1997. Surely you can do it with canada. The keystone is not approved, we cannot have this conversation. Im for the keystone getting approved and the state visit if you do not mind. There you go. There was a moment in the president ial race during the republican primaries. I cannot remember who said it. One of the candidates talked about the keystone and set it to president obama to drive canada into the arms of china. I want to ask paul or in washington are skeptical about that. They say that they will send this oil to china, but will they get the pipeline built . What are you seeing on how likely this will be for a pipeline to the east coast or west coast anytime soon . There are substantial options. It is open. There are substantial opposition. It is not a votegetter in British Columbia where it needs to look at it. Look at the rhetoric around the post keystone period. It was a little overheated. They tried to demonize environmental groups and stuff like that. There hasnt been a fundamental questioning, but there has been a sense that it was too hard. Watching from afar, one of the things that stood out in the state of the Union Address tonight was what he said he read what he said. If we cannot get congressional action, we will take executive action. One of the actions he can take is reject the Keystone Pipeline. That would allow him to that is something that [talking over each other] it was really going to be on the broader Climate Change agenda. There are different bills in the house. There were five bills in the senate. My view is that they know the challenge in the United States for reaching their Climate Change targets. They also know that they have shale gas. They now that even the market is doing some of this for them. My interpretation of what he would do is that he did not have to declare to use executive power. My interpretation is different than yours on what he met. Only one person knows for sure and that is the president. A couple of points. I find interesting new here this discussion on the president saying that he would take executive action and the interpretation from canada means no keystone. There is no linkage of saying he would take administrative action to reject the keystone. It is only that he is signaling anything about keystone. It is interesting that the two communities see it that way. It is important in the dialogue to step back from the rhetoric. Everyone wants to say that it would go to china. Many companies that you talk to are looking for alternative ways to send it to the gulf coast, because that is where it makes the most money. You do not want to ship it all the way to china. You do not want to have to go through the east coast and go through the panama amount all the way to china. You lose a lot more money. Keep that in perspective. It means getting it to where the market is. Lets pivot. Lets talk a little bit about trade. It might be implications on energy and Climate Change on that as well. Maybe we can start with what is the state of the relationship of trade between canada and the u. S. . Looking for different partners and trying to expand. What are the longterm challenges and ramifications on seeking new partners . Lets start with canada. We just had a meeting on friday with a number of people on transpacific partners. That includes the three c