We heard from departmental officials that the bill would scope the reasons by which somebody could reject a claim for a transfer. The concern we raised was that the minister could, for whatever reason he wanted, reject the transfer. The department said, “Oh, no, this isn't the case”, that it would be scoped, and the minister could only act within certain boundaries. Yet as I read the legislation—and I'd be interested in your take on it—there's a section that says “and any other factor” that the minister wants to take into consideration.
Speaking to the panel assembled here, is there anybody who would share the department's belief that the minister would be so constrained, or would you share my concern that in fact no such constraint exists? In fact, even in the absence of this bill, the government is already seeming to reject most claims for transfers.