To me it seems a little sloppy. I think to most people it would seem sloppy, and it may be, frankly, an example of a recurring pattern.
You indicated that management has been an example of ongoing improvement since 2004, that you budget responsibly, and that you try to stay as economically independent as possible. But when I look at your operating statements, frankly, I see an operation that, for every dollar it brings in, spends $2.50. That's not very independent.
We have an organization, deemed to be a crown corporation—and I think this is what really bothers Canadians and this is why this is a story—that reports to the government and has an accountant who is not licensed, who has signed off on a month-long trip to Australia for its chief executive officer, and that is spending $2.50 for every dollar it takes in. The taxpayers are paying for this operation.
To be clear, you went to the board first with a plan and said, “I want to go to Australia to have a look at how their ports are doing business.” Is that correct?