I guess, for me, having something put in a piece of legislation that is absolutely—and this isn't a partisan remark—at the government's discretion is troubling. It seems far better to have dealt with it upfront.
In your presentation you talked about mandating a review process, and I want to turn to the Stopping Spam task force report. In recommendation 22 it reads: “The federal government, through this coordinating body, should monitor the impact of the implementation...”, and so on. It had a number of things: monitoring the impact, evaluating the results, providing regular public reports, consulting with stakeholders. Is that the kind of process you're recommending in terms of a mandated review?