Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Just to pick up where I left off, it's nice to see that you're listening and that action will be taken.
We're talking about economic viability in rural Canada. What was shocking to me about wanting to construct an aerodrome in Canada was that Transport Canada does not look at any economic viability or a business case for an aerodrome. That was outright shocking to me.
There are two other things that should be concerning for the members of this committee. Transport Canada—think about this, in the age we're in now—approved an aerodrome site for two runways that do not point in the direction of the prevailing wind. They're to be constructed at 991 metres. That's 3,250 feet. Why would that be concerning to Transport Canada? Well, it's because anything over 1,000 metres requires a federal economic assessment. Both these runways were approved at 991 metres. My spidey senses go off right away: Why would that be?
The other thing that I think our officials here would understand is that if you were building a new airport, surely if Transport Canada looked at economic viability, you would want a runway at 5,000 feet. Would you not agree?