Thank you for your questions. I'll try to be brief.
It is true that on the record Canada has not lost a lot of cases. For the cases that Canada lost, if you look at them carefully, you'll see that there were indeed problems in the situation where Canada was found in breach of the agreement. I don't know of any cases where Canada lost in a way that was absolutely impossible to accept. I think those were cases where Canada was, indeed, in breach of its agreements. And it continues. The latest decisions that were rendered continue.... Canada has not lost recently in cases, and this average of wins and losses is continuing, I would say.
As for Indonesia, it was mentioned that one has to think about ISDS, and one has to think about the substantive provisions. Those are two different things. It's important to continue to have very well-drafted, circumscribed and substantive provisions, possibly with exceptions, as Professor Appleton mentioned, and basically to continue what we have done with CPTPP and with CETA.
As for the ISDS, as I said, we should have a clear and coherent way of handling this, and I think we should continue to have ISDS with Indonesia, definitely. As for which type of ISDS, well, in our bilateral agreements, we have incrementally improved ISDS, and we should continue in that way. So yes, I would continue to basically apply our latest drafting of bilateral agreements with Indonesia.