First of all, I would come back to grain on the farm, and the reality is that no matter the number of bushels that need to get off the farm, it is all going to start by moving in a truck. The efficiency to move it by truck to an elevator on CN or on CP is actually far better than what we're talking about with extended interswitching. To the extent that a farmer or grain company wants to choose which elevator on which railroad, that situation already exists today, and I think that tends to get overlooked.
In terms of rates, per se, the rates themselves are regulated under the maximum revenue entitlement, so it's not clear to me how interswitching is really leveraging a rate environment, whereby that rate environment already has existing regulation.
Certainly, with respect to service, if there is some condition in which service becomes an issue, there are already multiple layers of regulation where that shipper has recourse to actually raise those service issues. Whether it is through the level of service complaint, or whether it is through the service arbitration process, and even on the rate side for all commodities, we already have in Canada, which does not exist in the U.S., a final offer arbitration process that can deal with the rate issue in the case of commodities that may be impacted other than grain.