Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Aterman, I appreciate that you came into a situation where there was a very bad process for adjudicating complaints. You proposed a change. I believe Mr. Tilson and Ms. Kwan are correct in noting that the change doesn't measure up to what we would normally feel to be the best practice or the normal standard for adjudicating a judicial role. Typically, when you look at what happens elsewhere in the country, even if there's an investigative role that happens internally, the complaints are reviewed by a panel that includes lay people, which is to ensure that the public has confidence in the system.
If we are being independent reviewers of your system, I think from our perspective there are more steps that need to be taken to see it improved further. As to whether your decision would be correct in terms of whether or not to convene the review panel, some of the processes we've seen include that role.
However, there were 170 complaints, and you said only 21 were founded. That seems to be saying that 85% of complaints that are being brought are unfounded.
Are these often brought by the counsel? How does this break down, this 85% of unfounded cases?