The CCR shares the concerns around reappointments. It has to do with competent members not being reappointed. It is often said, when talking to people who seem to know what is going on, that under this government and under the previous government it can be whether persons have political connections that facilitate their reappointment.
There's also the concern around reappointment of members who have been extremely problematic. I have heard of occasions when it appears that people have really not been given approval in the board member evaluation process, but because individuals have strong political connections, they are reappointed despite misgivings of the leadership of the IRB that conducted the evaluation of their competence.
Certainly there is an argument to be made for not keeping board members for too long. It's a very difficult job and not something that people necessarily could or should do for many, many years. But having a large turnover is also very destructive, because of the acquired expertise. It takes quite a long time for someone to become knowledgeable, and new members also need competent and experienced members to mentor them as they begin. The current situation, where there are virtually no reappointments, is very damaging to the board.