I can't speak to the specifics of that case, but I can talk to it related to the TPP and other trade agreements whereby, whenever there's a dispute or there's arbitration, one of the biggest problems is that the majority of protections are with investors and not the states, and that according to all the United Nations experts, investors have been very successful in imposing fines or winning these cases against states that try to protect the environment or that try to protect food security or issues like that.
One of the issues with the TPP is that there's no process. There's no requirement that the arbitrators or anyone involved in the TPP know anything about indigenous rights and title. New Zealand specifically included a provision in theirs—I don't have the wording in front of me—which contemplated the fact that there should be a process that protects arbitrators and investors from interpreting treaty rights because that's a domestic issue, and it's a sovereignty issue as well.
There's no such protections in the TPP for Canada. Again, we have a problem. We are a country that was very specific about putting in that protection. The legal presumption internationally is going to be that Canada chose not to.