Probably over the summer we'll be finishing that. I don't know what the timeframe of this committee is. It's complex, because it turns out there are a lot of bilateral agreements.
Nevertheless, I think the reason we're doing that is that it has become evident for Canada that it's a real restraint on provincial and federal government action to have to worry about this kind of investor challenge. It's the fact that even though there's great rhetoric, even though it says we want a high standard of regulation, we want to improve environmental regulation, and we want to comply with the environmental treaties, as I said, the fact that it can be case-to-case challenged by investors is the problem. Even if we don't think those challenges are going to be won, which I hope they won't given the Methanex precedent, the arbitral panels don't have to follow each other's rulings. That's the other problem here. As soon as we're taking these questions and saying, “Fine, Canada, you decided to protect the environment; investor, you can challenge that,” that's a problem.