Okay.
But then we must ask ourselves whether one alternative, at least, is not to give up or sign away our money and our rights.
We've said all along over the five years that we're prepared to leave $1 billion, but for a good deal, a commercial deal. We're not prepared to leave $1 billion for the privilege of surrendering the legal cases and memorializing that the United States, not Canada, really won.
Were our jobs and families in northern Ontario not so much at risk, we might not care so much or speak out so strongly, but they are. So we are not looking for perfection; we are not opposing on principle this deal or any other deal, but we want to be as far away from worthless agreements as possible. We need a deal that works for Ontario and all regions of Canada. We need more than a political agreement delivered by June 15. We need a solid, reliable commercial agreement that provides short-term gain by returning our illegally collected deposits, preserving our legal victories so that we are not starting at ground zero in Lumber V, and allowing the Canadian forest industries to remain viable in all regions across Canada for the next seven years.
We cannot afford short-term gain for long-term pain. We fear that we are certainly not looking at perfection, but we may well be looking at its antonym.
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.