Our approach is fairly standard. We try to follow it in every circumstance. I can give you the example that I am currently familiar with, and that is the revisions to part III of the Canada Labour Code. Part III of the code has not been revised for 40 years. It's a very substantial piece of legislation.
Three years ago, the previous government set up a commission to study the issue. Professor Arthurs from Osgoode Hall Law School was given the task of recommending to the government what changes should be made. The professor took three years to study part III and presented his report to the minister in October last year.
The minister has come to the view that he needs to discuss these recommendations with these stakeholders, because it is not appropriate in the area of labour legislation to act in a way that doesn't have the consensus of both parties. So the minister has gone on a cross-country tour to hear from employers, unions, and non-unionized workers what their reaction is to the recommendation. The minister has found so far that there are certain areas where all three parties totally disagree with the recommendations, there are some on which they all agree, and of course there are some where there is a difference of views.
It is not clear to us now how much more time it's going to take to have a legislative package if the government decides to go down that path. It takes a fairly substantial amount of time to make sure they can put something together that is very precise, and see whether or not our stakeholders agree with that.