No, I think that in the 1990s, when it was an extremely preliminary and high-level concept, they decided that there would need to be a new corridor identified, perhaps on the trip somewhere saying that maybe we actually would use the alignment already created for the highway that goes through, because it's already been alienated from other uses and might be available. There's apparently a hydro right-of-way that could work, but east of the I-5 is where most of the people feel you're going to have to do a bit of a greenfield development.
Your witness from Calgary has pointed out some of the challenges that raises politically, but they feel a new alignment will be necessary to get to the higher- and high-speed rail connection. One concern we have in Vancouver, and why we have to be careful here, I think, is that when we get to the next stage we have to be sure that we bring in our existing goods carriers, because they're relying on those routes already to carry freight traffic. As I think you've already heard, you simply can't keep adding in passenger trains and expect it all to work out. At some point, you have to make a decision to create a corridor for the passenger traffic.