Well, if I may, Mr. Chairman, I think the review is a sensible thing to do at the beginning of all of this. Doing it in a year is good timing. It allows the results to then be put into play for the next round with a year to spare. That's plenty of time to get at least some of the architecture in place to make this work the way it was intended. Now, whether more is needed after the review, sir, I don't know. It would depend on what the review discloses. But that would be the reason for looking at the timing.
On November 20th, 2007. See this statement in context.