Indeed, you're absolutely correct, it's an issue that we've considered very carefully and seriously over the years, because it has been raised by various interests, not just the port authorities but those that use the ports and those that benefit from the cargo that is either imported or exported from the ports.
We've taken a close look at the regimes in the U.S. Whereas in Canada we have a consistent regime, clearly defined in the Canada Marine Act, clearly laid out in the letters patent for each port authority, what we have found in looking at the regime in the U.S. is that there are many different models. Some of the ports are run by the county, others are run by the state, others are independent, others have a different relationship with the federal government, and a port authority in the U.S. doesn't necessarily just deal with port operations. For example, as regards one that is very well known, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, I believe that only 5% of their total operations relates to ports. The rest is a multitude of other elements. Clearly, they do receive funding, in some instances, but does it go for port operations or does it go for a multitude of other related operations that the port authority may be involved in? That has to be looked at on a case-by-case basis.
What we're doing here, though, within a very clearly defined policy objective, is to put Canadian port authorities on an equal footing with other ports in North America and around the world and to ensure that they can work more effectively with their private partners or with the public authorities—the province and municipalities—to allow them to receive federal appropriations, something that they can't do now.