You've read my mind, Chair.
The situation with a convention or an agreement is very straightforward. It's an agreement between sovereign states whereby both countries, as countries, are committed internationally to the agreement. Our infrastructure, if you will, and our tax laws are all built around that. When we enter into a new tax treaty or tax convention, it plugs rather neatly, with this implementation bill, into our tax laws.
The one China policy means—I'm trying not to make a foot-fault here—that Canada recognizes the People's Republic of China. As I understand it, Canada takes note of China's position with respect to Taiwan but does not do more than that. I think functionally, as I understand it, that means we don't treat or deal directly on a state-to-state basis with Taiwan. What was done in this case to try to implement a tax treaty-like relationship with Taiwan was to have an agreement or arrangement between the trade offices that each jurisdiction could implement—in Canada's case, that Canada could implement—domestically. So while it might not hold the status of an international treaty, by virtue of the changes or the legislation we have here we can give it the same effect in Canada while respecting our position with respect to both China and Taiwan.