I'll turn to the deputy on the budget question.
Thank you very much for your acceptance on the report. I think it would be a great exercise in terms of getting views on the table on all aspects. The committee can do some excellent work there if it chooses to do so.
In terms of the inspectors, the system of safety is more than just inspectors. I concur that what we have seen in the past 18 months are increased numbers in the shipping of dangerous goods in terms of oil via rail. That is a function of the fact that the oil has to make it to market and it's going through the rail system.
With respect to our system of safety, we have safety management systems, which I've asked you to take a look at. That really does make sure that the culture adopted in the rail companies is one of safety and that it's in everything—it's in their people, it's in their manuals, it's in their procedures—and we have seen a decrease in the number of accidents as a result.
At Transport Canada we have rules and regulations that we've had for a number of years, which we expect to be followed. When they're not followed, they are enforced. We have inspectors who do their work across the country in both the transportation of dangerous goods and with the Railway Safety Act itself. I believe we have 35 inspectors for the transportation of dangerous goods, and we have about 100 inspectors on railway safety.
But it's a system that works from within. It is a layering effect: it's the safety management system, it's sound regulation, and it's having inspectors there as well.
Perhaps there'll be a discussion at the committee with respect to the need for inspectors versus having enforcement in other ways, shapes, or forms, so I look forward to the results from the committee.
In terms of the budget with respect to rail safety, I defer to the deputy on that.