The eight days is a good tool. With due respect, I don't buy into the vulnerable, ignorant, scared claimant who needs to be hand-held. I agree, what we need to do is to provide training on the intake side. We need eight and sixty. If, for operational reasons, the financial consideration to make eight and sixty happen is not there, we have to then push back in time the eight and sixty.
The other design is to make the information the tribunal will be using as transparent as possible. One of the defects in the early days of Canada's refugee determination system was the opaqueness. Behind the scenes, the refugee judges—board members—were using information not available to counsel. Parliamentary inquiry led by Professor Hathaway back in 1993 exposed this. That is a guard.
At the back end, we need consistent application of transparent guidelines for what will happen to the individual post-refusal. We also are missing something very important. Deny access to the provincial immigration intake system. What's missing is wording to the effect that you are not eligible to be a provincial nominee when you are a refused refugee. It has to be done in the statute; otherwise, you're still baiting the path with state candy, as I call it.
Those are the fundamentals, and overall you have to resource CBSA properly to provide a fast removal system at the back end of the process. All else fails if you continue to reward overstays when the failed refugee is lingering.