Well, I have to say right off that every institutional arrangement faces its challenges. What I would have to say is that it's not the IRB that didn't want to establish the refugee appeal division; it's the Government of Canada.
Now, that said, and admitting that every institutional arrangement faces its challenges, I do think it is possible to have a tribunal at which there is an appeal division that operates independently and professionally. I think we're very encouraged by the steps that have been taken to professionalize the nomination process for the IRB, and that's where the effort should continue.
Certainly there should never be a case in which one agent is reviewing his or her own decision. That is a basic principle in law. It's just not a fair way of doing things. If there's a separate division, if there is this increasing professionalism and expertise in Immigration and Refugee Board members, then I think it addresses our worries.
Perhaps there is no one perfect solution, but it just seems to make a lot more sense to have one tribunal in Canada, one in which people are professionally chosen, professionally trained, kept to a very high standard, and kept independent of government, as opposed to trying to create two.
I think you're suggesting that there be even a third institution, one that's not the IRB and not CIC, but it still is a duplication of all these resources, training, and so on, and in the present context, to create a third government body just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.