It's a very good question. In terms of what we proposed in this case for imidacloprid, for example, the actual proposal is to phase it out over a three- to five-year period, so the proposal, at least, indicates that a significant transition period is available.
I would point out that for many and perhaps most—but not all—of the existing approved uses of imidacloprid, there are alternatives. There are approved pesticides that could be used for those uses. On paper, at least, there are alternatives. I do acknowledge that some of those alternatives may not be as economically viable or economically advantageous for agriculture, but for the most part, there are registered alternatives available.
As well, over the next few years, depending on the phase-out period, we would anticipate manufacturers approaching us for approval for new pesticides to be used in place of imidacloprid, should we have to go there. I should point out that we're still in a consultation phase on a proposal.