Thank you very much for your comments and your questions.
Let me begin with the points specifically related to the lumber agreement. First of all, we've spent a great deal of time with the value-added producers and we're working very closely with them to make sure their interests are reflected in the final terms of the agreement.
With regard to the point about an independent arbitrator, there are provisions in the agreement for independent arbitration if an issue goes to dispute settlement once the agreement is in force; that's in the future. What we have done, though, is hire some consultants specifically to help us address the issues of relevance to the value-added remanufacturing sector. We've brought extra expertise to bear on that issue.
One of the provisions in the agreement that will be very helpful to them is a provision whereby, when border measures do apply--that is to say, when the price is below $355 per thousand board feet--the remanufacturers will be charged on a first mill basis. That way they don't get charged on their value-added production, the value that they add to the final product that they ship to the U.S. These remanufacturers, to the extent that they've been shipping to the U.S. and paying these duties along with everyone else, will also get 80% of that money back; that will help them going forward.
As for raw log exports, there's no provision in the agreement relating to log exports, so I'll leave it to others to comment on that.
In terms of the link to the pulp and paper industry and fibre supply, the agreement should also be helpful from that perspective. I know it's a concern, particularly in coastal British Columbia. Again, the producers will receive this influx of cash as a result of the refunds. This should help them to be more competitive and maintain their operations, and thereby maintain the fibre supply--basically the chips--that go to the pulp and paper producers on the coast. I think it should be helpful all around.