I think there has to be that discussion about who is going to cover the liability insurance. Right now in the province of Saskatchewan—and I can only speak to that—the short lines have to carry the same liability as the class I railways. That's a recommendation that the class I railways say to them.
Now, when you come into the transporting of dangerous goods, it's a different issue, so I think what we really need to have a discussion about is who should be covering those costs. Should it be the shipper? Should it be the carrier? Who should be covering it? At some point in time there's going to be a cost to it, and at the end of the day there's going to one payer, and that's going to be the consumer. The costs are going to be put onto the product at the end of the day. I think we need to have to some real discussion on what that number would be. Or should it even be raised? In the province of Saskatchewan, there's no history of a claim ever exceeding or reaching the $25 million.
I think that when you look at short lines and the regulations that the province has put onto them with speed limits and the movement of dangerous goods...because the short lines still fall under the federal regulations in the transportation of dangerous goods, and then they control everything else provincially with speeds and access to communities. I think there has to be a bigger discussion. I know that Lac-Mégantic was an anomaly that we never want to see again, but before we do knee-jerk reactions, we really should have a discussion and a focus on what we're trying to achieve here at the end.