There are a number of elements to your question. First, I would just flag that the extension is no later than November 1; it's not that November 1 is the new implementation date. I'd like to make that clear at the outset.
Second, due to complexities on both sides of the border--and as you mention, particularly relating to termination of litigation--the two governments decided to make this extension. From the Canadian side, it's also in reaction to stakeholders' requests for an extension because of the complexities of filling in the legal documentation. However, I should say at the outset that the legal documentation being requested of the Canadian side is progressing well; that progress continues.
You have noted in your intervention that there are issues, one of which relates to the United States court's requirement to lift an injunction on liquidation. That is required before the agreement can come into force, because if you liquidate without the lifting of the injunction, the United States would be in contempt of court. Of course, courts are independent of government, and the timing of their decisions is not under government control; we are, however, working with the United States to do all we can to expedite that process.
We feel that the extension timeframe we're speaking about is sufficient to resolve the issues you have identified with the U.S. court. I think that Canadian companies.... As I say, many stakeholders have requested that extension because they still have to contend with the legal documentation required. I'm not sure if it's exacerbating the problem in Canada; I think what we're seeing is time being used to bring a fuller expression of the support for the agreement, which requires the termination of litigation and liquidation. That will happen simultaneously with the coming into effect of the softwood lumber agreement. I think it's perhaps better to put it in those terms rather than as an exacerbation of the problem; I think it's taking the time needed by both government and industry to deal with the complexities of the litigation and the legal elements surrounding that.
I hope I've addressed your major points.