I'm not sure. I hope I didn't contradict my colleague in any way. She made good points, so I'm not sure what that made mine.
However, on the situation of the committees, the agreement does specify a number of structures, some of which are government only, some of which are industry to industry. I won't pretend to understand how those are expected to function at this point, but what I would be asking the government to do is to both spend time working with the U.S. government in preparation for setting up the structure and principles in a way that they believe will strengthen this agreement and in fact give it the chance to run to its full term. I think it's very important that these committees be given all the opportunity they can have.
That said, I'm not exactly sure how you do that. I think the risks are self-evident. I think the risk, if we do not approve this agreement, is that the political climate in the U.S. changes very dramatically. In fact we did get the President involved, and the senior administrators, for once, in solving this 20-plus-year deal. I don't think an opportunity will present itself again, and I think the chances of going to Lumber V very quickly are real. In fact, they could ask for special presidential orders to impose tariffs on Canada going forward. So I think the risks are very real if we reject this.