I'll come back to my question.
Transport Canada investigated the incidents. Officials from the department say that they noted deficiencies and had them remedied. However, nothing of that was disclosed to the public. Personally, I do not believe that Transport Canada publicly confirmed that all means had been taken and that there would be no irregularities in the future. I also don't have any way to be sure that ADM has remedied the problems in the system. It's as if no one is assuming responsibility for the incident. I agree that we must not be alarmist and overreact to the smallest incident. Nonetheless, I do not have the impression that some person or body , at the end of the day, assumes responsibility.
Earlier in his presentation, Mr. Cherry said that he had met tenants individually to remind them of their responsibilities regarding controlling access to the restricted area. Personally, I don't find it reassuring to know that he met the tenants. Will those tenants take his remarks into account? Should it not be ADM's role to take measures to control that access, rather than asking tenants to do it? We are talking about a high-risk area. Moreover, there are tenants who don't necessarily listen to what their landlords or managers have to say.