The equivalency provision is absolutely critical. As I had started to articulate earlier to Ms. Duncan's question, this data is most useful when it is reported consistently. We have many companies that report in multiple jurisdictions. We have companies that are listed in the U.S. that would ultimately be required to report under the Dodd-Frank requirements, and we have companies that are listed in Europe. If they have to report in Canada and also in Europe, there's a reporting burden that's doubled, especially if the rules are not quite aligned. If the definition of “payees”, for example, is a little different, or the payment categories are a little different, or the project definition is a little different, then all of a sudden you have to prepare two separate reports with potentially different numbers.
There's an added burden to companies and also there is the possibility of inconsistent numbers that render the data much less useful.