I would submit two things.
There is a process by which the department, in collaboration with other departments like Health Canada, is working through large batches of assessments. My understanding is that their prioritization is a scientifically based prioritization. I would imagine that they would take input from whatever sources in that prioritization. I can't speak to that in any great detail, simply because I don't work in the program.
What I would say is that the questions you're asking here speak to, if you will, the transparency that comes out by describing this chemical management plan. And then having to report across the whole government how much progress we're making in reducing the risks to Canadians and to the environment from toxic substances would help parliamentarians in providing, I believe, their rendering accountability to our work, and also providing us with guidance by suggesting we've missed, for example, uranium. I don't know where uranium is on the list, but that's an example of the kind of input that can come from this kind of process.