Good. I'll try to be as brief as I can here.
I'm just going to read for you Gordon Ritchie's testimony when he came before the committee, Minister, because I know you weren't here. He said:
From the outset of the free trade negotiations, the Americans insisted on carving lumber out and managing this trade under the infamous memorandum of understanding of 1986. When that was terminated and the Americans lost their case before the free trade panels in the 1990s, they refused to pay back the duties until the softwood lumber agreement was concluded. This time around, the administration's refusal to stop collecting duties, let alone pay back the duties already collected, is a flagrant violation of their NAFTA obligations and the provisions of their domestic law.
I read that to you leading into my next point. With regard to the dispute mechanism that is in this agreement, there are some people who have said to me that this dispute mechanism alone would be reason enough to sign the agreement. Could you please explain for us a little bit more about the benefits of this agreement?