When Mr. Coderre was minister, and he was followed by Ms. Sgro and Mr. Volpe--they all expressed their sincere, I believe, intention to implement the RAD, but they all said it had to happen in the context of other broader streamlining in the system. I have all the quotes, and I agree 100% with what my predecessors said at the time. They were in a difficult bind, because it's not easy to come forward with a comprehensive but balanced reform of the asylum system. It is not easy, believe me. I've been working on this, burning the midnight oil for a year and a half on the policy details here, and this is something that department officials have been working on, frankly, for years, as Mr. Coderre will well know.
The point is this. Everyone has wanted to bring in an appeal division, but within the context of streamlining, and that's what we're able to achieve here. Through the moratoria on post-claim recourses for one year, through the faster first-level decision, and thanks to faster removal at the back end of the system, we believe we can introduce this additional level of administrative fairness in the refugee appeal division without further burdening an overburdened system.
I want to underscore that the refugee appeal division foreseen in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act 2003, and proposed, for instance, in Mr. St-Cyr's private member's bill, does not actually include, as does the RAD in Bill C-11, the ability to present new evidence and in certain cases to have an oral hearing before the appeal division decision-maker. This is an improved RAD. It's an additional level of administrative fairness, but it's not going to happen if we don't achieve the other streamlining in the system that the package speaks to.