Yes, my understanding is that the unions are reviewing the way they've negotiated those. We're certainly in favour of transparency once the agreement is concluded.
My personal advice would be for the committee to share with our negotiating team before or when we enter FIPA negotiations with another country, to say, for example, that we'll support a deal that includes x, y and z. That's how the Americans do it. Congress typically tells the administration, under a fast-track authority—they don't have it right now, but they've had it in the past—that they'll support a deal that includes the concerns x, y and z. Once a deal is tabled, assuming that it meets the concerns of the committee, in the case of Congress, it's the ways and means and finance committees, and the Senate....
To us, that kind of approach would be more constructive than, once we've concluded a deal, to say, “We don't like that part. Why don't you renegotiate it?”
That makes for what we think is a very efficient situation.