First of all, it's a question of transparency and near-participatory democracy, because although there are some consultations, regulatory power is much more limited.
The parliamentary process is much more open in terms of consultations. We're seeing that today: we have experts, young people defending the rights of anglophone Quebecers, bilingualism and so on. This makes for a much greater variety of views in consultations compared to the regulatory process, where consultations are more limited.
Then we have the issue of flexibility. You lose flexibility when you put everything in an act rather than a regulation. This could be reconciled by putting more in the act for the reasons I just mentioned, but also providing for a review of the law at shorter intervals.
There was reference earlier to a review every five or ten years, but I would tend to plan for a review every five years, because the census happens every five years and it's so important in terms of language policy.