No, we would agree. One of our concerns is that there's no point in having a prescribed timeline if there's no consequence for not meeting it. For any rule that is broken, if there's no punishment and if there's no consequence, then there's no incentive to respect the rule.
We understand there's going to be instances where there's a lot of information being requested. It may take a great deal of time to get that information, but it should be explained to the requester then, at least the broad outlines of it. Otherwise there is a big feeling of powerlessness on the requesters part, in that you've been given an answer that it's going to take months or years to do something, you have no idea why, and you don't have much recourse other than to complain to the commissioner.
We definitely think these timelines should be enforced, one way or another, and that reasons should be given when they can't be met.