I think so. I think what we tried to express is that we do not favour a definition based on a percentage of value.
I can give you an example. If you're producing, say, 1,000 tonnes of ground beef and it has perhaps 800 pounds of imported meat and maybe 200 pounds of Canadian trim, the imported meat is 10¢ a pound and the Canadian trim is 40¢ a pound; yet in the Canadian expenses you can have a product that's 80% imported meat but 60% Canadian by value. In fact, the cheaper the imported material, the easier it is to meet that standard.
So we think--probably very similar to what Mike said--it's the process of what it is, the substantial process. If you're taking an imported animal, an imported cow, and converting that into beef, we think that's substantial. If you're doing a lot of processing and changing the essential character, we think that's how the rules should be qualified.