Thank you very much.
It's good to have you here today. I think the Chair made it clear in one of our emergency meetings that we had hoped to have CN here earlier, when Via was here to talk about the incident. We're glad, even though it's a bit delayed, to have you here today.
I recognize the work that your crews do. I certainly saw that first-hand when we had our devastating floods and mudslides wash out the CN track. The professionalism and hard work of your crews to get that service back up and running in record time were certainly noted and valued by the community. Knowing that it was possible made it difficult to understand—you've given some context here—the reasons there wasn't access to the stranded train.
Obviously, if you have problems on both sides of the incident, there are going to be delays. I did ask Via this question. I'm going to ask it to you as well. When a train hits an object on the track, there's the risk that it could have been much more serious than it was, I think. The train did not derail. There wasn't a breach of passenger carriages, etc. After the delays in getting to the passengers and providing any additional services to them, my concern is what would have happened had the situation been worse. What would have happened had there been a significant derailment or the carriages had been breached?
You said that crews were able to get to the scene relatively quickly and were then unable provide any additional assistance. Would your protocols have been different? Would there have been more that you could have done if you had deemed the incident to be more serious than it was?