My point is that why bother putting a label on a country if every case is specific? We could put more resources into the RAD, the refugee appeal division. I believe in the RAD, though we didn't apply it for all the reasons mentioned, but I think they have been doing a good job there. So I would accept appeals to the RAD, but why bother saying this or that country is safe when we know there might be some cases that are truly specific? Why shouldn't we focus on putting more emphasis on an appeal board, on the humanitarian level versus the refugee level?
I believe in having an extension, like you. Eight days is way too short. Maybe it should not be 30 days, but maybe 15 days. I don't mind. But at least we need a timeframe that's suitable, because every case is specific and we all know about the psychological trauma and many issues there.
So if we want to be more efficient, don't you think that instead of putting a label on a country, it would be more efficient to go through the process with resources?