Thank you so much for being here today to share your expertise in this particular area.
It is a well-known fact that air traffic in Canada has declined significantly in the last 10 years or so. It isn't much of a coincidence that the steepest plunge in that frequency of air traffic occurred in the year following September 11, 2001, with the terror attacks that took place on that day.
I guess that trend has only recently started to show some signs of recovery, but we're still nowhere near the totals from before 2001. I'm sure the recent volcanic activity has not done anything to improve that either, but September 11 really was a game changer for the world in many ways, not the least of which was for our aviation system and the security that surrounds it.
Restoring the confidence of Canadians in air travel has meant that as governments we've had to respond with new comprehensive security measures and other measures to counter the reality we face from terrorist threats. I think Canadians have two concerns when they're going through airport security. One of those is in regard to ensuring that they are safe and feel safe on the airplane they are about to board. The other one is that they often face long lineups at security, and they want to make sure that, in ensuring their safety, they're not unduly delayed.
I think some of the most recent measures taken to deal with both of those issues would include the full body scanners that are being installed at the major airports and the development of passenger behavioural programs to identify suspicious or erratic behaviours. I'm wondering if you could speak to those two measures.
First, in your opinion, what is the effectiveness of the full body scanners and of the observation of individual behaviour? Secondly, how much better do the two measures work when they're used in concert? Do you see any weakness inherent in one of the measures that's sufficiently covered off by the strengths of the other measure?