Peter, on occasion people have been tempted to accuse you of having talent, but I don't think you have enough to replace Mr. Volpe yet, so please allow Mr. Volpe to do it himself.
All kidding aside, there are no politics here.
I was quite intrigued by your presentation, Mr. Chudnovsky, and those of the others as well.
Last week when we had CN here, they made two observations that I'd like you to comment on. One was that weather factors have contributed to what appears to be an increased number of accidents. The second was that the culture of safety had not yet permeated the employees in the organization to the extent that CN had been attempting to put in place. I hope I'm not misrepresenting their case, but it seemed to me that those were two themes that came out of the explanations.
Now, I'm one for having discussions on an ideological basis, but I don't think that has a place here. But you appeared to come forward with a discussion about B.C. Rail having, with its employees and safety management practices, a standard that is far superior to that of CN. I find myself a bit like the ball that's being batted on either side of the net.
Would you care to comment on that? Give me an indication as to whether I'm off track--pardon the pun--in thinking in terms of getting standards that appear to be rather objective and making a decision on that basis, or should I just weigh what you say and what CN said as being two parts of an ideological discussion?