You're right to characterize the potential competing objectives of timeliness and efficiency on one side and thoroughness and due diligence on the other.
However, I'm of the view that those objectives aren't mutually exclusive. They don't necessarily run counter to one another. You can have an efficient and effective process that doesn't necessarily equate with years of review, so long as the criteria being used are transparent, defensible and in line with best practices. I would not say that a more effective and efficient review process—which is what we recommend in recommendation 4.29—necessarily correlates completely with time. We can be strategic about how we go through the review to ensure it is covering all the bases from a due diligence point of view but isn't cumbersome and lengthy for other reasons that are not contributing to the effectiveness of the review process.