I can't answer the last part of your question, but I think it's important for us, as officials who have to make recommendations and are making them.... There are three governments—the two provinces are working hand in hand with us on this—and we have stakeholders. As you are aware, Mr. Volpe, when you get into environmental assessments and into making decisions, those who are perceived to be affected negatively will want to understand what the evidence is behind those decisions. It's important for us to have that information.
As you mentioned, the population growth in the corridor has been extensive, but a lot of that growth has been in the two conglomerates: in the Greater Toronto Area and the Golden Horseshoe, and then in the Montreal area. Some of the other communities, even places such as Windsor, where I originate, have lost population, and so it's not even across the corridor. There are pockets of the corridor where that growth has happened.
We need to have that information. I think it's important for us to be able to make the proper assessment and document what the benefits and some of the impacts would be on the other modes. I'll tell you, having been around the Department of Transport for a little while, that even when you make investments in VIA Rail, you get the other modes expressing concern about it, because first, you're paying for capital, and second, you're paying for operating. A high-speed rail system likely will require significant operating subsidies as well, not just capital. Most of the systems around the world are government-subsidized systems, and we expect this one will require subsidies as well.
It is a big investment for both camps, and you want to make sure you have the information and can justify why you would be recommending whatever direction ultimately is recommended.