I have to admit that I'm having trouble understanding this. Earlier, you were saying that you analyzed the risks and the threats, which were deemed to be low with respect to security. You also said that the cost would be high.
So, perhaps you could explain why, on the American side, they are currently investing millions of dollars in infrastructure along the border, such as at Franklin Centre and Jamieson's Line. Why do they consider security to be critical, when you are telling me that threat is minimal? The Americans are constantly telling us that the Canadian border is a sieve, and yet you are saying that we should shut down ports of entry and that this will have no impact on security?
So, in your opinion, will the drug, gun and human traffickers be going through ports of entry that are serviced, or will they prefer the border crossings which are not staffed?