In answer to Mr. McGuinty's question, if you look at them, the first two lines of the motion are general in scope. It was Mr. Bell who specifically requested that it become more particular, in terms of CN Rail accidents in B.C. and western Canada. Since the motion is becoming a little more specific—because most of these accidents are in western Canada and have been somewhat grave in their consequences—we want to make sure, especially given that today Mr. Gow raised the whole issue of the sale of BC Rail to CN as resulting in the consequence that we had safety issues that weren't addressed properly.... He made that very clear, and there's an acknowledgement in the industry generally that it is the case. That's why it is so important that we include this in the motion, so that it doesn't slip through the cracks.
We want to make sure we have a representative here as a witness who can shed some light on that whole transfer.