First of all, the bigger picture, I guess, is the NAFO Convention. We have conservation enforcement measures that don't need changes to the convention. Overall, it is getting countries to agree to UNFA. There are now 65 countries that have signed on to UNFA, as of March 7. They're important in setting that. There are ways to control them: rule vessels out for fishing, deny access to port, deny market access for illegal products. Those types of things, I think, are impediments to pursuing illegal fishing.
IUU fishing in the NAFO area, for example, is not an issue anymore. Overfishing and IUU fishing are two separate entities. IUU would be overfishing, but it could be legalized overfishing, where you set your own quota if you disagree with it. If the objection procedure is brought in now, it would be agreed that they would have to go to a third independent party to indicate whether there's justification for ignoring the scientific advice.