Mr. Chairman, Mr. Boshcoff, the suggestion is that if you had, as you put it, the “destruction of the Canadian Wheat Board”, which I disagree with....
The vision we have is of a new entity coming out of this. It's a new generation cooperative type of structure that actually has contracts with those independent line companies and perhaps even owns a piece of one of the terminals that are currently available on the west coast. That gives them the assets and all those other things. But I would suggest this to you. If your concern is that the only reason these port facilities are being utilized now is that some sort of subsidy is being given to them by the Canadian Wheat Board, that is kind of at odds with the ability for them to give the farmers the best deal.
If the best return to the producers is to go through Churchill, they should go through Churchill. If the best return to the producers is to go through Thunder Bay, they should go through Thunder Bay. I would argue that they probably are doing that because it is a good port. If the best return to the producer is through Prince Rupert, which is a day and a half closer to the Asian marketplaces that we want to hit with value-added products, then that's where they should go.
So I'm curious about the argument. I don't have facts, but the logic would say to me that if they're getting the best deal for producers today, there should be no concern. The market will dictate that they're going to go where the best efficiencies are.