Thank you for clarifying that.
I should emphasize a point that nearly all the witnesses agreed on. While I understand the government's position that it is not consistent with current practice, the absence of any guidelines or oversight mechanism is still problematic. In fact, the bill was introduced to clarify certain aspects of the act, but it does not provide for an oversight mechanism, and that's a problem.
Nothing is stopping Parliament from subsequently introducing guidelines and a procedure. Part of the first amendment sought to do just that. With an oversight mechanism in place, ambulatory incorporation by reference of all kinds of regulations would not be problematic at all.
But as things stand, no clear mechanism exists. The witnesses in our previous panel—and I'm not referring to the Department of Justice officials—made this point. It is simply a matter of clarifying the accessibility issue. Legislation should not include amendments that are not subject to the same oversight that all of the country's regulations are, the reason being it would simply go against the principle of transparency.