The $200,000 is used to evaluate an exhibition and then recommend whether or not enough risk has been mitigated to make it feasible for the government to assume the remaining risk. In evaluating an exhibition, the staff has a number of things at its disposal. For instance--and this is just one example--there is a major book on just about every artist who's ever been and the last prices that they have sold to in public auctions. So if we get a particular painter who looks like he's out of whack--and this has happened, in fact the Canadian institution just turned down a lender flat because the price was inflated--we have indications. The actual cost of the assessment is for reading fees by experts who then come and compare their notes, etc. We have experts for security and for fire. We have three conservators who look at the particular fragility of aspects. We have experts in transportation and handling of exhibitions. We have experts who are curators and who are familiar with these kinds of works. We have experts who look at everything from how much light is going onto a delicate piece of paper or what particular company....
I can also add that many of my contacts are international, and certainly I'm on a virtually weekly contact basis with my colleagues in other countries, running indemnification schemes. We share our own experiences when it comes to particular problems that we're not sure we've covered.