Transport committee  Under a certain level, yes.

Transport committee  It happens.

Transport committee  The question will be, who is the operator? I'm going back to the notion of operates. “Operate” is defined in the act in a way that it's the physical operation of a railway. It's not how you operate a business; it's the physical operation. You have to be involved while you physically operate your railway.

Transport committee  I was only a part of one meeting. Lenore may be able to add something.

Transport committee  The comment was made to us. We gave the same explanation I'm giving you, and this seemed to satisfy the concern.

Transport committee  The comments that were made, the explanation that was given, and the explanation as to what “operate” means in the context of the act seemed to address the concern.

Transport committee  The problem with that language is that if I have a railway that carries traffic on the railway line of another railway, and there's an accident, who has control of the traffic is technically speaking the railway that's carrying the traffic. I think the intention of the government was to avoid debate as to what was the cause of the accident.

Transport committee  We provide tons of legal opinion in the process of drafting legislation. When in the drafting room, that's all we do. We provide legal opinion to the client who is beside us. In terms of a formal legal opinion, I would probably say no, but in terms of legal opinion in the context of this bill, a lot.

Transport committee  On that point, yes.

Transport committee  On this issue of what these words imply?

Transport committee  Mean. Yes.

Transport committee  Personally, I'm not going to be able to table it. It's protected based on solicitor-client privilege. It's for the department to.... I give opinions to the Department of Transport and then they.... Normally I can say the Department of Justice and the Department of Transport are not in the habit of providing legal opinion in public.

Transport committee  I can't speak for the policy, but the intent was to allow damage suffered by parties to be compensated first.

Transport committee  Indeed. If we assume a billion dollar insurance coverage, and if within the billion dollars there's not enough, damage suffered by private parties or cleanup costs will come first, will come before, if there's not enough before non-use value. If there's enough, then it's a moot point.

Transport committee  Okay.