Thank you for your question. It's a good one.
I'd say there are a few reasons, the first being that it's a general document.
It's a document that we have supplemented primarily over the last several years through our five-year spectrum outlook. Our spectrum outlook is basically a document that sets out our policy priorities for a five-year period. As I mentioned, rural and indigenous gaps were a big one in our last version. It also sets out what our spectrum release schedule looks like over the next couple of years, which industry uses for planning. The five-year planning cycle for industry is very important to ensure they know what spectrum is coming. They can design their networks around it, and they can decide where they're going to invest capital.
We've found that the spectrum outlook has been the policy signal that we've been able to use to complement the framework. It does not imply that the framework itself is not due for a refresh, but that has kind of been our policy statement over the last little while.
With regard to the point about five-year cycles, we actually issued an interim update to that outlook back in June, primarily because we do see the advantage of checking in more frequently than every five years to just say, “You know, we see some new things coming. We've seen that the U.S. is doing some things with spectrum that we may want to consider. We see that the space sector is growing. What do low-earth orbit satellites mean for connectivity? Here's essentially what else is coming that you should know about.”