That struck us as being the similarity, although of course one can pick away at it, as it were, on the basis that there are specialities in the Canadian constitution. There were some issues that were declared to be non-justiciable and so on. There were interesting parallels, both -- that is the central one, there it is, an act of Parliament which requires the protocol to be kept to, effectively, and then they withdraw from the protocol. Then subsequently there is an act.
But there is also a sequencing interest there, which is the Government acting on the international plane, in effect to commit Canada under the previous administration, then the legislation, then another act on the international plane, which was, as you say, directly contrary to the legislation itself and then a repealing act, ultimately, as one sees from paragraph 12 but my Lords, my Lady, there it is.
If you want it, it is in tab 26.
EFTA, we have dealt with, if you have the separate note in relation to that.