My first appointment was for seven years. That was a good length. Then I was reappointed for two, and then there was a new system instituted for appointments. I can make a few comments about the new system, I suppose.
I find the requirement for the incumbent to apply a bit unusual. I think it's unfortunate, because it's always up to the government to decide whether they want to retain the person or whether they are fed up with them and want to look for a new person. There's nothing to stop searches going on a little in advance of the termination of the time. So I think it's unnecessary to require an application from the incumbent. It's an awkward situation.
With respect to the interim appointments, I think they're necessary because sometimes they simply need a bit of time. But I think it's unfortunate when there's a series of them, which raises a bunch of questions from people about legitimacy and whatnot. I'm sorry that it has taken this long for the system to get ironed out, because there are a number of cases where interim appointments are being made. I think they do raise questions because the interim appointment is at pleasure, as opposed to being for a specific term where you have to be removed by Parliament.
Are those the kinds of comments you're looking for?