Thank you very much for your presentation.
We got into a discussion a minute ago about strategy versus framework. They're very similar, in the sense that what we're saying in our strategy discussions and what I hear you saying in your framework discussion is that there's a role for the federal government to play in designing a system whereby funding would happen and whereby.... That's really the number one issue. How do you get money into this system to build it? Where is the money going to come from to build it? And once that happens, once there's leveraging in the private sector, the municipalities, and the provinces, then you triple or quadruple the amount of money that's available and you build the systems. I don't think we're very far apart in terms of what we're talking about. It's all about money.
I also liked what you were talking about when you suggested that people take their cars, really, because it's faster. It's really about time. If there's a public transit system that comes to my door every five minutes and gets me to where I want to go in a reasonable period of time, I'm going to use it. Once you've built something that is that effective, it also, in turn, becomes more efficient, which means it starts returning more of the investment back to the people who put it together. Am I right? The density, as you said with respect to Hong Kong, and the frequency of use and the ability of the system to be convenient and displace cars actually makes it more economically viable for municipalities and maybe the private sector, although it's difficult in Canada.
Is that correct?