I referenced the same clause that Mr. André referenced. It will be in the blues.
Coming back to lumber remanufacturers, there is no definition of “lumber remanufacturer” in the act. In fact, when we talk about the issue of related parties that is in clause 6, we've had a custom—and Canada has actually fought for this under the WTO and NAFTA—that related persons are deemed as unrelated when they treat each other as if they are unrelated. In this clause, for the purpose of this act, we have a specific definition that is certainly not in Canada's interests: that “related persons are deemed not to deal with each other at arm’s length” regardless of whether or not they have traditionally treated each other as if they were unrelated. So I'd like you to comment on that.
Also, under clause 25, there's no appeal process for lumber remanufacturers. What would be the appeal process if the minister decided to punish many of the lumber remanufacturers that have opposed this deal? What is their process of appeal if the minister does not accept their application?
I would like to go as well—