I think the conflict or controversy about this bridge is the question of ownership. This sort of thing doesn't happen very often. It's not usual for a public infrastructure to be owned not solely by a government in Canada, although I understand there are other examples, but it is certainly a new thing for the Northwest Territories. We are advised that the bridge will be subject to all of the highway laws because it will be construed as being a highway for that purpose, but at the same time the Minister is indicating to us there will be some negotiations as to who is going to be responsible for any risks or responsibilities that arise out of that. Also, whether one gives permission about what could go on that bridge or what different uses there might be. There is also a question about ownership. Are we to understand that all those provisions are subject to agreement, and what is the mandate the government is taking to this negotiation process from this legislature? Can we know about what the government's position is with regard to these areas, the use of the bridge and the liability question? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.