The other aspect I want to talk about a little bit is that some witnesses in previous appearances before the committee--Peter Alterman, for instance, as well as another witness--indicated that Canada's model is based on getting it right the first time and providing other avenues of recourse through the CIC-administered pre-removal risk assessment process and discretionary assessment of humanitarian and compassionate factors. That's the model that Canada has, which maybe is unique compared to other jurisdictions.
Taking Bill C-280 and making an appeal division in the midst of that model might to some extent be counter-productive if you're not changing the model. Can you describe whether I'm right in the assessment of the model we have in Canada and how it may be difficult to add something to a model that's already put together without looking at the whole model, including the RAD--in other words, looking at how you might deal with the system as a whole as opposed to piecemeal?