I have two questions.
First, in my opinion we're trying to infringe upon provincial jurisdiction. If they did reach an agreement with the federal government, they have that agreement in place and they have the prerogative to make that agreement different from what it is currently. They certainly considered all the aspects of that when they did that agreement.
The other thing is that the NCC has a limited budget. Although it may seem simple to transfer money from one federal department to another to maintain bridges, I would suggest that based upon the snowfall in this area since I've been here--six years now--it's going to be quite a budget to maintain. It would have to be quite an enhanced budget, and I don't think we have the capability to do that at this stage.
I would like to hear from the officials if they recognize the budgetary constraints of this particular motion. From my perspective, it would be quite onerous on the NCC. I'd hate to see a situation where all of a sudden the parks suffer as a result of the cost to maintain bridges and to maintain something that has already been taken care of.