Perhaps I can take on both points.
First of all, I think all of us around the table would agree that multilateralism is the best option, so why is it not happening?
I hate to disappoint you, but my own view is that the Doha Round will not restart until there's a new U.S. President. The current President is going to have a very exciting election in a month's time and may well lose control of the House--perhaps not the Senate, but the House. Even the degree of American commitment to Doha is quite questionable, including their willingness to put some of the hard stuff on the table, such as agricultural subsidies in the United States. My own view is that Doha has no chance of restarting in a serious way until we have a new U.S. President, who then will have to go to Congress to get delegated authority from the new Congress. We're looking at 2009. I wish the government great luck in trying to get things going between now and then, but for me that's realpolitik, which means we have to think about things to do in between, and we'll come back to that.
About ICSID, I don't know. I do know, though, that Canada's strongest interest is in having a rules-based system, a system of strong and clear rules toward dispute settlement. If ICSID is driven by that, then it is absolutely desirable. One of the sad things that happened globally in the last decade was the failure of the multilateral agreement on investment. We pursue bilateral investment protection as a substitute, but the optimal would be to have a global system protecting investment on an aggregate basis.
If anything can be done to make Canada both a signatory and a ratifier of ICSID, I think--without having deep expertise--it would be the right thing to do. On a principle basis, pursuing vehicles that protect investment is absolutely a good thing, because Canada is now a net investor in the world. We're no longer just a receiver of foreign-directed investment; we now have outward flows of investment that are far greater than the inflows, and the sales abroad from those outward flows are almost as big as our goods exports. Outward investment is a critical piece for successful Canadian international business.
I like Jay's line a lot about international business. I tend to use that myself, Jay, when I go out to talk to people. It's not just trade and investment; it really is looking at this as an integrated piece of how our businesses are going to succeed in the world.