Certainly in terms of debate, the committee has access to the House by its powers to report to the House, and of course it could propose concurrence in such a report. In that sense it would be somewhat of a guarantee that once every five years the House is seized of the subject matter. As far as guaranteeing change goes, that's a little difficult. Minority parliaments have more clout than majority parliaments.
But it's important to look at our 25-year experience. There was a mandated review in 1987 and very little happened. The next event was 1997, for an amendment to subsection 67(1). The next event was 2006, with the expansion of the statute of the FedAA. All three were not correlated. All three never had a parliamentary review in the sense of what we're advocating here. It's a question of timely seizing the House and the committee of the issues of the day and the evolution and maturing of the system.