I don't think the goal of harmonization is simply reduced costs. As a regulator, I mentioned talking with scientists who were involved first-hand in the discussions with their colleagues. It builds their confidence. It builds their understanding. So from the very basic level of reviewing the pesticides, there's a benefit to working internationally and harmonized.
There is clearly a benefit to sectors such as agriculture, which is competitiveness. It's not reduced costs, it's competitiveness. It's their having access at the same time to the same products. This is a key tool. And the more we assist them in that framework, the better off we are. And as I said, it's a propitious timeframe because there is this general recognition now that newer pesticides, generally speaking, are safer for humans and/or for the environment.
I have met, for example, with the Sierra Club and with the Environmental Defence League and discussed pesticides and discussed our approach to harmonization, and they recognize that newer products are generally safer, so they also want us to increasingly see the registration and use of newer products in Canada and the elimination of some of the older more problematic products.