It's a little like telling people receiving Employment Insurance benefits that if they win their case in front of an arbitrator and it's unanimous, the government should not have to pay the airfare from Ottawa to Bathurst for the judge or arbitrator because it's too expensive. Even though the government believes it acted appropriately and that it was not mistaken when it refused Employment Insurance benefits to an unemployed worker—a $150 cheque—it is going to cost $5,000 or $10,000 to recover that $150. So the message seems to be that, because it's too expensive, justice will no longer be done and we will no longer rely on our judicial system. That is pretty much the message I am now hearing from them. Do you agree?
On March 18th, 2010. See this statement in context.