You're right to suggest equal voices of multipartisan organizations. We've undergone a process to gather input from diverse perspectives in terms of the experience.
Not everyone will believe that the process is independent, even if it is perfectly executed, because there is that perception that the ministry of labour—if asked to make an investigation—is in fact a political entity, and that there might be considerations about whether or not an investigation occurred or did not occur because it fell into the hands of the ministry of labour.
The legislation absolutely has its limits. We've looked at policies and at legislatures that bring in the ombudsperson, the Public Service Integrity Commissioner, and that really look to make sure there are mechanisms that are non-politicized. I don't know what's possible here. You've received all sorts of technical advice, but the legislation is only as good as it's perceived to be, and that's where there are some challenges with the current proposed language.
I'm confident that there are some workarounds, if the committee tried hard enough, because that's where absolutely there remain some challenges. Although this legislation is well intended, and in spite of the respect we have for Minister Hajdu and the process, I don't think we're quite there, no.