Thank you for your question, Ms. Laverdière.
I will take the opportunity to add my comments to those of Professor Walsh and Professor Hanham regarding the purpose of sanctions. I will also talk about human resources and the mandates that you and others have talked about.
First of all, the purpose of sanctions is quite simple.
I will speak in English for a minute and will then continue in French.
Professor Hanham and Professor Walsh made it perfectly clear. We didn't touch it. We looked at it from a purely business perspective of the costs being imposed on our client, but they made it perfectly clear that the objective of the sanctions, when they're targeted at the kinds of abuses of human rights that go on in North Korea or the proliferation issues that were going on in North Korea and in Iran until the agreement was signed and so forth—there are really important issues at stake.
What happens with the sanctions regime is that we do a bit of what Professor Walsh said. We, as the administration, the government, impose sanctions and then move on.
In a sense, you've outsourced the enforcement to the business community, but our clients, and neither Vince nor myself, have the resources to figure out whether so-and-so in Tehran or in Bandar Abbas is somehow related to the Iranian national guard or some other person with sanctions. We really are spinning the wheel here.
The other point that Professor Walsh made was that once you've committed to the sanctions, it's a really tough political act to ratchet them down or ratchet them up. It's a political tool that's very difficult to meter to specific articulated objectives.
I will get back to your question about mandates now.