We think that there are some reasonable, modest reforms to the model that can make ports more flexible. Really, they all kind of go together.
I previously worked in the airport sector. They have a very different model. We're not suggesting that this model needs to be changed, but we would suggest greater flexibility in terms of being able to develop revenue lines. If a port wants to develop a revenue line in an area of land that is, perhaps, not critical to commercial activity, given that we do recognize that land has to be protected and water access needs to be protected, perhaps we need greater flexibility in terms of putting up an office tower, for example, on that land that can serve marine and non-marine uses.
We would also suggest more flexible borrowing. My understanding is that our ports don't have the same financial capacity that other organizations of a similar size would have. It can take a year or longer.... You're hiring a consultant, and then the work is redone. I think in our early discussions, Transport Canada has recognized that it could be improved, so we're hoping to see that be improved as well. Really, it all goes together.
There's a role for infrastructure funding as well to push some projects over the line. I know it gets overused a lot, but it's a whole tool box of financial flexibility that we're looking for.