I'd like some clarification from the officials. Again, with all due deference to those who are very concerned about security in the United States—I am no less—I'm not surprised that there would be great focus on this. There's been a huge industry built around security and paranoia, most of it directed to us.
I would like whichever official, perhaps Mr. Di Sanza, to explain one thing for me, if you will. The proposed amendment to section 61--that's proposed subsection 61(1)--says that “a port authority shall take the appropriate measures” but ends off with “including having an annual security audit performed by the Minister of Public Safety.” Is this obligation on a port authority to constrain another minister from another department to fulfill his or her duties consistent with this legislation?