A model was put in place in the original NAFTA, which we then followed. It's the same thing for the bilateral agreements. A model was put in place in 2004 that we then followed for FIPAs.
I think you were asking about transparency with respect to the process for the ISDS claims. There are transparency provisions in CPTPP. They were in the TPP agreement. They include open access to hearings and to documents being made available to the public.
The key difference, as I said earlier, between what was originally agreed to in the TPP agreement versus what we had done before was the reference to investment agreements. There could have been a breach-of-contract dispute between an investor and a country—for example, Canada—or an investor could have made a claim if an investment authorization had been withdrawn—for example, under the Investment Canada Act using the net benefit test.
Those were suspended because we had never included such provisions before. The Canadian position is to not include them. That's why we convinced the others to suspend them too.