Mr. Keenan, just on account of time, I'm going to have to move on to my next question.
I acknowledge that progress has been made, and the Auditor General pointed that out in her audit. The question was about the fact that there were things the Auditor General pointed out that weren't done. I think the Canadian public would expect that all recommendations would be implemented, especially over an eight-year period.
I'd like to move on to the safety management systems themselves. This was a large part of the audit. I've been speaking with the rail companies. This is an issue that is of serious concern, not only for the community I live in but for communities up and down the railroad in northwestern British Columbia.
Maybe I'll start with a question around response plans, because I think that when we think of safety management systems, we mostly think about preventive measures—behaviours and actions that prevent bad things from happening. My understanding—and you can correct me if I'm wrong—is that safety management systems also include response plans in the case that things do go wrong.
Of particular interest, given the increase in dangerous goods being transported through our region, is the risk of something similar to Lac-Mégantic happening in one of our rail yards, where we have multiple cars of extremely volatile products like liquid propane parked on the tracks.
When I was speaking with the rail companies, they told me that first of all they rely on first responders, mostly volunteer fire fighters in small communities, to respond to these events. They provide training, but they only work on scenarios involving single-car events.
In your view, given Lac-Mégantic, given these multi-car events that have tragic consequences, should the safety management systems have response plans for events involving multiple cars? In your experience and based on your knowledge, is that a risk that communities should be concerned about when it comes to products like liquid propane, and is the current approach that the rail companies are taking adequate?