If I may, I'll answer those questions, which I did answer, by the way, when you were away.
On the first question on SMS, SMS implementation is a cultural change. As I explained before, we cannot expect to see major shifts or major safety improvements from one day to the other. We're trying to implement this, and we're trying to instill cultural change throughout the transportation industry in Canada, but it could take years before we see the benefits of that implementation. I could come back later to explain more about this.
On the proposal that we now have for flight attendants, first of all, we are convinced it does not affect the level of safety. If it did, we would not propose it. We're in the safety business, and we're there to maintain or improve safety, not to reduce it. You may hear or you may have heard different points of view on that issue, but we are pretty much convinced that we are not reducing it.
There was in fact a proposal made in 2001 to change the ratio of flight attendants, and we rejected it because we felt it wasn't safe. The proposal that's now on the table has nothing to do with that proposal. The 1 in 50 that we're now proposing is accompanied by a series of mitigation measures, which make it equivalent to the 1 in 40 rule that we have now.
You talked about Australia. We know that the ratio is different in Australia. We also know that in all European countries, in most Asian countries, and in the United States, an approximate percentage of 90% of all the travelling public in the world is using a 1 in 50 rule. We have no evidence in any of those countries that the lack of flight attendants has been the cause of death for people.