From an industry structure standpoint, I don't think the fact that a number of Canadian companies, including mine, have invested in the U.S. is really a pertinent issue with respect to the structure of the SLA.
We believe, both in British Columbia and nationally, that the structure of the 2006 SLA, which would be characterized as a bottom-of-the-market structure that provided provinces with the options to use either a tax-based system or a volume-based restriction as the basis of their access to the U.S. market, was a good structure. I think it meets the respective needs and interests of the different provinces under that optionality provision.
I think economic circumstances have changed since 2006. There are opportunities to modernize the agreement and make it possibly more effective than it was under the old structure. Susan described the root of this issue as based on timber pricing as it relates to land ownership issues in the U.S. The real factor here is really what happens at the bottom of the market, particularly when the Canadian dollar is weak, and a tax-based structure or volume-based structure that limits access or reduces access of Canadian production to the U.S. market when the market is weak is the right kind of a structure. It makes much more sense, from our standpoint, than a volume-based structure.