Your question relates to this Guatemala case, which means that all obligations have to be demonstrated to be done in a manner affecting trade between the parties. This particular language was in a U.S. mandate, what we called the May 10th agreement of 2007. They had no flexibility on this.
We had concerns. This was not Canada's approach at the time. At the same time—at the table—we had a long discussion on this. The understanding amongst negotiators was that the U.S. said they had this text, but our understanding was that anything trade related would be deemed to affect trade between the parties. This was the interpretation that Canada would take.
Anything that was trade related—all of Canada's agreements have this criteria of trade related—because it was the understanding of the negotiators.... We would take the approach that if anything was trade related, it would be deemed to affect trade between the parties.