I can start by giving a little context on the U.S. position on the appellate body.
The U.S. concerns—as have been cited by the member—are not new. For a number of years now, we have been hearing concerns about the way in which the appellate body operates.
I think that certainly any WTO member who has been involved in disputes at the WTO probably has some issues with some of the specific results of cases over the years. Certainly in a Canadian context, I can think of more than a few cases where we were disappointed with the way in which the appellate body took a decision on a particular issue.
Notwithstanding the fact that I think there are legitimate issues that need to be addressed by WTO members in looking very critically at the appellate body and the way it functions, both procedurally and how it handles certain substantive issues, what is important is that there is a need for a constructive dialogue on this. Certainly Canada and other WTO members have been ready to engage in discussions in Geneva in trying to find ways to reform the appellate body. We certainly see this as a very fundamental part of WTO reform.
This past year, New Zealand's ambassador to the WTO, Ambassador Walker, launched a series of discussions aimed at trying to find a solution to some of the long-standing problems affecting the appellate body, including addressing problems that have been identified by the United States but also by other WTO members.
Unfortunately, engagement by the entire membership was very uneven, and we did not see any engagement on the part of the United States on some of the specific issues that it had raised in the past.