I would like to comment as well.
As we've listened to witnesses throughout our many meetings on softwood lumber, what we've heard is that if industry supports the agreement, and the agreement carries, then they don't need, or it's not necessary, that they have loan guarantees. The amount of time and effort it's going to take to set up the loan guarantees and actually implement them so that the companies can benefit from the loan guarantees is longer than it would take to get their money back on the deposits if the agreement passes.
For the second time, I think your motion is not well worded and it's premature. It's like the previous motion that we just voted on. We're going to know tonight where industry stands on this. We will know tonight whether or not they support the agreement and we will have a very good feeling as to whether or not loan guarantees are required or not required and whether these deposits will come back. That's what I wanted to comment on, that this is what we've heard from witnesses.