We took...
If you don't mind, I'll do this in English, because it's going to go faster and time is of the essence.
At the time when the act was coming forward, we took a commitment to gender-based analysis and to gender equality seriously, and we did a lot of work to ensure that the new provisions--the selection criteria, other parts of the act--would not negatively impact men or women. As we were doing that and trying to build that capacity in our department, I think the discussion at the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration was around, how will we know this is working if we don't have a review of it after the fact? So a motion was put forward, and the decision at the time was to include it into our ongoing reporting against the act, so to look at what the gender-based impacts of the act and the implementation of the act were over time. That was the original thought behind that, and it was welcomed and included in the act as the government went forward with the bill.
As for what it has done, as Peter said, it has been a catalyst for us to make sure we think through what we need to do: how do we make sure this continues, where do we look at and prioritize where we do our analysis, and where do we focus as we move to implement this requirement?