Sure. Thank you, Arun.
It's a great question. It's something that the department has thought about over numerous cycles of softwood lumber, since I've been involved in the file, since 2001.
I can tell you that it's very difficult, what we're doing here, with our U.S. domestic proceedings, the countervailing duty investigations, the anti-dumping investigations that any U.S. industry has a right under U.S. law to bring.
I think one of the impediments we face in coming to a final conclusion is that the U.S. coalition, the U.S. lumber industry, has a right to sue under U.S. law. In order to even reach a softwood lumber agreement like the one we had the last time, they have to suspend that right or at least come to the table and indicate perhaps that there's going to be no injury or that they're not going to move forward with duties.
That has always been one particular difficulty in trying to reach a final solution where we wouldn't have to go back to softwood lumber six or softwood lumber seven. I don't even like thinking of that.
To answer your question, it's one of the key problems—