I know this may come as a surprise to some, but we actually have stopped building at Pearson airport.
The point is that aviation infrastructure takes a great deal of lead time to build. It's incredibly expensive to build. If we were to anticipate that a portion of traffic would go off, in an ideal world, to high-speed rail, I would have to take that into account in the planning decisions I make at my airport and for the types of developments I make. I will tell you, quite frankly, my concern: that the very imperatives that drive high-speed rail and make the policy case for high-speed rail--we are into peak oil, or we're talking about the greenhouse gas emissions we have to deal with--are the very issues that will hollow out the aviation industry. By the time you've developed high-speed rail, there will be nothing to plug it into. What you're left with is a slightly balkanized country.
We are and we are not Sir John A. Macdonald's Canada, in that it is not practical for us to get from Montreal or Toronto to Vancouver by train. Could we get there by virtue of a mix of the two? These planning decisions take a long time. In order for us to plan adequately and appropriately our aviation infrastructure, we have to be able to match it in with what else is going on.
That is really why we're here at this time. We are here to make sure, to urge, that we have that kind of dialogue and that kind of conversation; we're saying let's take that longer-term, systemic approach to it.