In short, and to be frank—and I'm looking to Andrew to develop my answers—it doesn't stack up well compared to international examples. We've heard a lot about the U.K. I'd also mention New Zealand as a more recent and possibly better example.
Some of the key criticisms we've already heard about. I won't elaborate further on the lack of detail in plans, but that's one obvious area of improvement. Similarly, Andrew mentioned the need for a bigger runway—a bigger lead-in time—between the targets being set and the plans developed, so that we have better advance warning that allows adaptation and innovation.
Finally, I'll talk about the advisory body. There are various amendments that could be made to take Bill C-12 closer to the U.K. model in order to better insulate that advisory body from the political process and give it that cross-party consensus that's been so successful in the U.K.