As a general comment—and again I've said this publicly quite often—if I could roll the clock back eight years, I would never have used the term “SMS”, because it has now become a buzzword.
Comparing safety management systems quite often is a comparison of apples and oranges. So I have no knowledge of what BC Ferries' SMS looks like, but I will tell you that it may or may not be the same as what we have here.
The other thing that comes into play when you are talking about the comparisons of safety management systems and how we've compared them otherwise is, what exactly are the bases or the principles they're using? You will find some divergence there.
When we built this system—and as I mentioned, we started eight years ago with the experts at the time, such as Dr. James Reason, who came to our executive—we spent three days looking at all the options and then we built on that, looking at what the chemical industry has. They have a very good reputation.
I think the oil industry certainly has a good reputation. In fact, we've taken the advice of people who work for Shell, dealing with the SMS that Shell demands. For example, if you wanted to contract your aircraft to Shell Oil, you'd have to demonstrate a certain safety management system. Again, the requirements are somewhat less stringent than ours, but it would give you all the basic principles.
So we're quite confident that what we have is as demanding as anything that's out there. We believe we're taking a step-by-step approach to it, so that if we are picking up errors and problems with the system, we'll be able to correct them before there are any downstream effects. Even the regulations that were put in place a year and a half ago are not active. In other words, what we've done is to say, “Okay, this is your starting point”, and then we put in place an implementation of two or three years, again so we can watch what's going on. So far, the results have been positive.