There are two things. First of all, data always moves easily. If we take it as nothing more than ease in moving the data, then the concern will be that the data will move and be transferred to the lowest-level jurisdiction for protection. I don't know that many Canadians would be comfortable if they were told that many of the protections they think they enjoy are lost because their data is being stored in a jurisdiction with no privacy protections at all, and it would be very difficult for a privacy commissioner to assert jurisdiction.
Even in the context of data transfer, what we often find takes place in Canada is that you might send me an email, and if you're on a provider like Bell and I'm on a provider like Rogers, that data may actually transfer across borders and boomerang back into Canada. So the issue of even allowing data to go across borders—I grant you that it is easy to do—has been raised as a potential concern by some jurisdictions.
I wanted primarily to flag this issue of localization because we've seen a strong commercial impetus for it. We've also heard the Government of Canada talk about it, and we've started to see it enter into the lexicon of trade negotiations. Given what we've heard from the Trump administration, it seems quite likely that we'll see that resurface as part of the NAFTA renegotiation.