There are merits to having both procedures in place. For example, when we look at high-cost major infrastructure projects, we believe it is important to have a rigorous technical review so that all of the options are considered, that we have detailed analysis to determine ultimately what the best route would be--or the alignment, as we call it in the industry--as well as the technologies that should be employed, and that this large project can stand on its own.
With regard to the gas tax transfer program, we have really benefited from that in the region. We have been able to use the gas tax transfer program to acquire well over 250 new buses in our region. Many of these are electric-diesel hybrids, so we're reducing our GHG emissions as well as other pollutants. We're also utilizing some of the money in building the infrastructure to support the bus system, for bus depots and this sort of thing, and we are acquiring new SkyTrain cars through the program.
The gas tax program has significant requirements as well, but we see it as being an excellent tool to work with when you need the flexibility to make bus orders that come up from time to time and to do less expensive infrastructure.
Both programs, we believe, are needed, but I would say that when you move to a very large infrastructure project, and when we're talking about rapid transit, you're moving into the billion-dollar range or close to it.... Even for rapid bus, you're getting into hundreds of millions of dollars. We think it's important to have a program that would look at the specifics of the project at that level.