With respect to the dispute mechanism, I think I went over the reasons for a dispute mechanism within the agreement. I think I've answered those, but I'm more than happy to elaborate on any points you may wish.
With respect to the technical working groups flowing from the binational softwood lumber committee, three have already been identified within the softwood lumber agreement. These are the regional exemptions, the customs issues, and the data issues that will arise and need to be looked at with respect to the operation of the agreement.
Other groups that could be created are with respect to those identified in the side letter from Ambassador Schwab to Minister Emerson. They include logs and lumber from private land and how to best treat those in the coming years with respect to the agreement, as well as running rules--this notion of how we ensure that the quota elements are running smoothly and have the discretion needed to work to the best advantage and to the most effective operation in Canada.
In all, right now, five working groups have been identified--three in the agreement itself, which will mean they will be activated, as well as two others that were identified in the side letters. We are sure they will also be formed to deal with those two issues. Right now, in terms of the number of working groups that we see established, there would be those five--in addition, of course, to the main overview steering group of the binational softwood lumber committee, as we've described to Mr. Cardin and Mr. André.
I've been listing your elements. Have I got them all, or have I missed something?