Absolutely. In Canada, we take a risk-based approach in how we assess crop protection products. It takes into account both the exposure and essentially how to manage that exposure. There'll be rules around how the product can be used that mitigate the risk of that product. That's an internationally accepted standard. It's what countries use around the world.
The EU does it differently; it just takes the hazard. It doesn't take into account, essentially, the ability to mitigate that hazard. When you take that kind of approach, it is naturally more risk-averse in how you would approach the regulation of these products. It's an outlier in the system, because the reality is that something can be risky, but you manage that risk. We do it all the time in our daily lives. However, the EU doesn't take that approach. What happens is that, when they are regulating their crop protection products or deciding what their farmers have available to them, they do it in a way where products can be removed much more easily. Then, like I said, the impact is that they decide that Canada can't use that product anymore either and they are not going to allow that.