Operator: Your next question comes from Ben Pham from BMO.
Benjamin Pham: Maybe just keep going on the free cash flow conversations, can you clarify — I think in the past, you’ve highlighted self-funding as $1 billion or $2 billion. I think maybe that was the number previously. Is your definition you’ve communicated today that does not include the debt that you can add on to new projects?
Cameron Goldade: Yes, Ben, that’s right. I mean when we’re talking free cash flow positive or free cash flow neutral, we’re talking about that strictly as cash flow from operating activities, less dividends, less capital. Not talking about the additional investment capacity that would come from incremental leverage on top of it.
Benjamin Pham: And you also mentioned of going to the quarter specifically, the conventional volume is up 6%, record for the quarter. Can you talk about the volumes maybe from the perspective of utilization versus your capacity? And any sense or ability to maybe break out some of the deferred take or pay up uploaded into the quarter from the first half?
Cameron Goldade: It’s a tricky question to answer, Ben, because obviously, there’s — first of all, we’ve got a diverse portfolio of assets. And in some cases, there’s more white space than others. Obviously, like our Alliance and our Cochin assets are flowing very close to capacity. And in fact, we’ve sort of worked with customers there to try and find as much capacity as possible. Obviously, the frac business, as we’ve talked about for quite a while and which drove RFS IV was getting tight across the board basin-wise and our assets were no different. And then when you zero in specifically on the conventional business, we talk about capacity in a generic form, but really, it sort of varies by segment and where the volumes come into the pipe and what volumes come in.
I think one of the value or the benefits of our system and our offering is, obviously, we do transport all product types, meaning ethane plus propane plus condensate and crude, and we can provide service all the way from Northeast BC down into Edmonton. And obviously, as a system is built out over time, you size it appropriately to the customers’ requirements. And so there’s various capacities, various sizing of pipe, various pumping configurations across the board. It’s not a simple answer. I think you can look at the capacity that we’ve disclosed publicly for the conventional business. We’ve been quite clear about that. That’s really sort of the Duvernay ineffectively. That’s — we always talk about that as the bottom of the funnel, and that’s the main governor.
But obviously, upstream of that in the different straws, it does vary across the board.
Benjamin Pham: And maybe to close off, some comments you had on TMX and timing of divestments. You’re indicating late ’24. Is that a reference to transaction announcement versus close? And do you also get a sense that the government needs clarity on the first phase before moving over to the second phase?
Scott Burrows: Yes. I would say that those comments are based on what we’ve seen publicly coming out of Trans Mountain. So it’s not necessarily our specific view. It’s what we’ve seen publicly from Trans Mountain. In terms of your second question, I think that’s a question for the government. We have no special insight.
Cameron Goldade: I would just say, Ben, I mean, to your point and to our message, I mean that is one of the many uncertainties that underlies this asset and this situation, and so you can just throw that in with the mix.
Scott Burrows: Yes. I’d say, Ben, as this has transpired, the more time has gone on, the more market seems to want some sort of certainty. But at the same time, on the actual asset level, there seems to be more uncertainty. And so I think that was the point of the message is I understand people want more certainty. But the fact of the matter is, as time has gone on, there’s just that much more uncertainty around this file.
