Given that all parties have indicated their support because these are technical changes, the issue of contention is the process around bringing forward these changes. For that reason, I don't understand why having a minority government would be seen as a rationale for delaying making these changes. Anyway, I'm not asking you to speculate.
One concern we also heard about a sunset clause—and there was discussion about an annual sunset clause, and I hear you proposing a two-year sunset clause, which gives a little more breathing room, and Mr. Vineberg raised it as well—is what if the unexpected happens? I'm trying to imagine if there's a way to have a sunset clause but with an escape valve. I raise that and wonder if that makes sense, or does that just negate the whole notion of a sunset clause? Do you think that is something that perhaps should be pursued? That there is a sunset clause: you don't bring these changes into law, you shouldn't have announced them, and therefore they will no longer be in force after two years, unless the sky falls.