Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I have two questions, and I will direct the first one to Mr. Allan and the second to the Boreal Initiative representative.
Mr. Allan—and please, other representatives can feel free to try to address these two questions—in terms of regional transportation, we mentioned rail rates. You described the service in British Columbia as being either poor or non-existent, and I would suspect a lot of that was directed to non-main-line service.
Would you think the same situation should apply to main-line services? In particular, I guess you could say the rail companies really have a monopoly, although there may be two, or short-line railways, in addition. When a company needs, say, pulp cars, when they need them fast, when they're expecting a turnaround and are forced to go into storage, this seems almost whimsical or uncaring in terms of railway servicing. Companies in the forest industry are already having a difficult enough time when they're actually forced to shut down a mill because they can't get railcars. How are we going to overcome something as fundamental as that to a nation when we talk about all those solutions you've proposed?
The second one—perhaps, to you, Mrs. Granskou—is the certification question. Right now in Ontario the province has agreed to the forest stewardship, yet there is nowhere in Ontario that this can be sourced or agreed upon, even after millions of trees have been planted in the province—and “millions” is an understatement. We already have in Canada the Canadian Standards Association and the sustainable forest initiative. So the question is, how can forest companies that are trying to meet the ISO and all these other types of standards get another standard and say, okay, those are fine, but we have another one for you? How can a company keep adapting? It's almost like the bureaucracy is adding another level to them after they've complied.
Perhaps the other presenters would also like to try to address those two questions.
Thank you very much.