That's a very interesting question. Thank you.
The way you phrase it, “set in stone”, is something that we, operating on the protocol side, on the visits, on the logistics side.... Setting in stone is not something that would come naturally, because we are governed by very fluid environments in which we must operate.
The focus is much more on the end result, which is delivering a first-class visit or event that meets objectives. The nimbleness that is required means that, yes, you do rely on standards of treatment, you do rely on past history for what is expected or appropriate for a visit or an event, but you also look for opportunities to bring innovation, to bring a bit of a fresh approach, obviously in consultation and in accordance with the wishes of those concerned.
Setting in stone would not be something we would gravitate towards. But we certainly would like our partners to have the comfort of knowing that our approach consistently will be to deliver first-class visits or events and to avoid surprises in the sense of undesirable outcomes, or the 0.1% that you were referring to.
I might add that we're aided in this as well by tools such as orders of precedence, such as records, much of which, by the way, may be found either on our website or on the websites of partners, such as the Department of Canadian Heritage.
It's not that we're making it up as we go along; on the contrary, but we do like to reserve the ability to be flexible to respond to changing circumstances, changing needs.