With regard to the matter of precedents, which also covers the domestic issue, frankly, softwood lumber has always been a little bit apart from the rest, just like milk is here in Canada. I therefore am hoping that this will not affect the other relationships there are between our two countries. There are however no guarantees in this regard. To date, no other industry in the United States had the will nor the political weight to convince the American government to completely set aside its legal commitments. But there are no guarantees.
Secondly, you and I both read the agreement in principle and nowhere do we see a concession on the part of Canada with regard to subsidies purportedly granted to our softwood lumber industry. I can tell you that when I was at the negotiation table, the premise was to reject outright any allusion to subsidies to our softwood lumber industry. We have seen that every time this matter has been put before an independent arbitrator, we have won.
That being said, this in no way prevented the coalition from repeating over and over that Canadian softwood is subsidized and, big surprise, its allies in Washington believe this to be true. Nothing in the agreement will change that.
I would have liked us to be able to include in the agreement that everyone accepts the fact that the softwood lumber industry is not subsidized, but we have not said that that was the case.
Finally, with regard to the reimbursement issue, I have no good news for you in this regard. It is crystal clear that the Americans will drag out this process, just like they did the last time, when we had to wait more than eight months for payment of a much smaller amount. This time, we will have to wait quite a while.
It is not for me to give you an answer to your question with regard to guarantees for the affected industries. Personally, I believe that we could mount quite a solid case in that area.