Right, but risk notwithstanding, there's a larger question here that applies to all ports.
If we look at the Port of Oshawa, for instance, they got into a position where they were in real financial trouble and their liabilities outstripped their assets by a significant level. I believe one auditor said that they were at risk of becoming no longer a going concern, which kind of sounds like going bankrupt, only port authorities can't go bankrupt because they're backed by the Canadian public, as public institutions.
I guess what I'm getting at here is that part of the trade-off for that flexibility is potentially increased risk in the case of a port that isn't as diversified or makes some bad decisions about investment down the road. How does the Port of Vancouver view that risk when it comes to the Canadian taxpayer essentially underwriting this borrowing that the port would take on?