Just so we don't imagine that this is all one-sided, because we do have another party or a series of parties called “the railways” involved and when they provided some thoughts to you, they've been very candid. What we have heard in testimony is that they would have preferred that this not happen at all. I recall asking in one of my questions, “Why did we ever get to this point?” As I say, that's less critical than the fact that we are now at this point.
To what extent did the input you received from the railways affect the legislation that you put in place in support of them as well? Because you can't have one party without the other party; it's clear that a symbiotic relationship is necessary. You need products to ship and that's what the shipper does, and in good faith the railways should be doing what they do. What was your response to the railways in terms of the input they provided you, please?