Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Again, thanks to all the witnesses. I certainly appreciate your testimony this evening.
Mr. Chair, I had mentioned about Essex being somewhat of an island. I don't retract that statement, because we basically are, but there are also a lot of islands that surround us. We have Pelee Island out in the middle of Lake Erie very close to Sandusky, Ohio. We have what we call Boblo Island. It used to be a great amusement park. We have Grosse Ile in the United States. We have Crystal Island, Fighting Island, Belle Isle, Peche Island, Turkey Island and the list goes on and on.
Something that hasn't come up in this testimony yet is Line 5. Because of transport, I think it's important to bring up the impact that more freight would bring to the shoreline. For those who aren't aware of Line 5, of course it brings our natural resources under the Mackinac Bridge to Sarnia. It delivers really important oil to the rest of Canada as well as to the United States.
My question, through you, Mr. Chair, is for Mr. Bryant.
I don't expect you to be an expert on Line 5, of course, but would it not make sense that both the Canadian government and the U.S. government—the governor of Michigan and our premier of Ontario—should come to a resolution on Line 5 sooner than later to stop erosion on our rivers so that it's not barges bringing our oil in but Line 5, which is completely encapsulated in concrete so there can be no leaks? Does that not make sense?
I would imagine that every time a freighter goes up and down the Detroit River or through Lake St. Clair, it's another pound of erosion from our seashore.
Does that make sense, sir?