Does anybody want to defend “not broken”?
I think you're on your own, sir, with that one.
Does it mean that the problem is, then, that because things didn't move, politically everything else backed up? You talked about bills being introduced and you said that then there was prorogation and they stopped. Does that mean, I'm asking, that the political process interfered, if you will, in what would normally happen, because your next steps are tied to that political process? And is that a problem?
Then I'm going to throw something out here, because I'm running out of time soon. When you run into a situation where your rules are not being followed, one of two things happens: you either have to get things in compliance with the rules as quickly as you can or change the rules to reflect the reality of the way things are. But you can't leave things out of sync.
There are two questions; that was the first one.
The second one would be, should the guidelines change? Should we say: don't try to do this every year, but do it in every other...period of time—some other identifiable timeframe—so that it's not broken? Or do we need to stay with the one year and get everything that's not working to comply with that one year?
Those are the two questions, for anyone.
Please.