I think that Ms. Langevin might have comments, but I would like to add something first.
I think, Madame Boucher, if you look at page 55 of our report, you'll see we have given some suggestions on what that legislation might look like. It's in the English, but I think it's the same thing in the French. Really, what we patterned the idea on is that there are a number of laws in place now that are trying to address very specific issues: the Employment Equity Act, the Environmental Assessment Act, the Human Rights Act, the Official Languages Act, the Multiculturalism Act. Our sense was that it would be similar in terms of trying to promote substantive gender equality. As I mentioned earlier, what a law would do is shift the oversight to Parliament versus the executive branch, where it is today. Today, as was being discussed, a lot of the oversight is really being exercised through the Treasury Board Secretariat, to some extent assisted by Status of Women Canada.
In my opinion--and this is my personal opinion--if this were to happen, it would probably have to be the Minister of Canadian Heritage, in her responsibilities for Status of Women Canada, who would have to introduce that legislation. Obviously this committee has a role, and if it felt it was important to have that, it could recommend it happen. It would then be up to the heritage minister, because she has the legislative responsibility for Status of Women Canada.
I know that Ms. Langevin has a strong interest in the legislative aspect.
Louise, do you have any comments?