Maybe I can jump in—sorry, Jackie—and then we can turn to Jackie and Greg.
First of all, it's probably important to recognize the context here. I described in response to a previous question that close to 15 years ago we developed a plan to look at the many thousands of substances that had been in commerce in the 1980s and that had not gone through the new substances regime. That plan was strictly a policy-based one we put together. We published timelines five years out, and then repeated those every five years.
What we're now saying in this bill is that because we're moving forward into a different regime and looking at different substances from different perspectives, let's have a provision in the law that requires ministers to publish a plan. They will be required to publish that plan within two years of the bill being passed, and then they'll be required to report on its implementation and to renew it from time to time. There will be a very clear obligation to have a plan. That plan will need to include expectations and timelines.
That said, coming back to Ms. Gonçalves's earlier point, it is the government's view that it would not be appropriate to prescribe timelines that would apply to every risk assessment, given the wide range of complexity associated with each different assessment.