Maybe I'll just touch on that alternatives question because we hear a lot about that, that as long as there are alternatives, the impact on growers will be minimal.
It goes back to what I said earlier. If the regulatory environment is questionable or if the companies are at a fundamental disagreement on the science with the regulator, the ability for them to bring new innovations to Canada will be diminished over time, without question. These are global companies. Canada is a relatively small market. It is a small market. Other than canola, and wheat maybe, every other crop is considered a very small crop, so it's not Canada that's driving the agenda for new chemistry.
Like I said in my testimony, PMRA has played a leadership role in getting those new technologies to Canada, so we commend them, absolutely, for that, but we can't be undoing that on the back end, to quote Mr. Drouin, on our re-evaluation decisions. Otherwise, the regulatory attractiveness of Canada will diminish.