I think it is relevant and important to note that the Clerk of the House has reported back to the committee that they did not get enough time to produce a legislative scrutiny because of this bill going through under urgency, and the committee noted that the fast-tracking of this bill should not include permanency clauses within it when the time frames for submissions have been reduced. They correctly commented that another bill with fuller time frames should address the issues that the judiciary would like to see made permanent. 