I don't have a sense of that for one good reason. The legislation has just recently changed, so as a result, all the cases that we referred to the CRA were first money laundering cases involving potentially drugs or fraud, etc., and tax evasion. Because the legislation has now made tax evasion a predicate offence, and there are regulatory changes as well--sorry, that was a regulatory change. There's the other legislative change reducing the threshold, and we can now focus in this area exclusively of tax evasion as a predicate offence.
On March 8th, 2011. See this statement in context.