—whereas my comment was about the more specialized function of the tribunal to review the decisions that are being made. I think you need specialized legal expertise and EA expertise to determine whether the determination that is made is appropriate.
I wouldn't want the appeals tribunal to second-guess the decisions that are being made. That's not their job. I want the panel to make the determination about what the impacts are, and so on.
I would advocate for an appeals tribunal that has the expertise to determine whether the criteria and direction that are being given in the act and the regulations are being properly applied by the decision-makers. Beyond that, decision-makers should be free to exercise the discretion they've been given. That requires the broader, general expertise that my co-panellist, I think, was talking about.