I understand. I still want to remain on the subject of what the chair said earlier about the legislation having been passed in Panama. It's as if, to them, concluding the agreement is not nearly as important as it is to us. This turn of events creates even more doubts about the issue. It's as if the government were saying that it was going to conclude this agreement, it was going to go ahead with it, that it has passed the legislation and that, even though the agreement is not...
For me, this development sheds some light on the positions that are currently being defended by our government. I understand that you can't answer my question, but we will ask other people questions, including this one.
I do have another question. A rather controversial bill was passed in Panama in June 2010. As a result, several fairly violent protests erupted. The passing of this bill even resulted in some deaths. It's something of an omnibus bill. There were protests because certain provisions of the bill were, among other things, restricting union freedom and posing an environmental threat.
The Government of Panama has announced that it would revise the bill in question. Do you intend to follow these developments closely? Is a process being followed, or has the department inquired about this situation?