I couldn't agree more. The Hamilton Port Authority is a great example. Based on the current legislation, we have a borrowing limit of $45 million, so there's no possible way we could even borrow money from the Infrastructure Bank at $100 million. Effectively, it would be illegal, so I totally agree that they need a more flexible approach to creating a two-tiered system, potentially even moving the Infrastructure Bank into more of a loan guarantee type of role.
The United States had a group called MARAD a number of years ago, and they dealt with loan guarantees, which could be another way. If the money is loaned to smaller port authorities, it's not viewed as a liability on their balance sheet, which would allow them to have more flexibility with their borrowing powers. However, you're right. The Infrastructure Bank means nothing to probably 14 out of the 18 port authorities in the country.