Thank you to all three of the panellists here.
My first question is to Ms. Houle.
It's very common for refugee complainants in the west, particularly in British Columbia where I hail from, to have it suggested to them, especially in the past, to transfer or move their files to Quebec as they are told that they can expect a much fairer decision. Hearing your testimony gives me some assurance as to why.
I have a quick question. Could you kindly afterwards submit a briefing, and maybe our analysts can provide it as well, as to what the Quebec selection process for the adjudicators is and what their complaint process is? I might have missed some of your presentation when you were first talking due to translation issues. I would like to know and compare it to the federal government's process, so I would ask you to do that.
My next question is to Ms. Jacobs.
We've heard that in many cases where the IRB member has a complaint lodged against them, there is a complaint and as soon as the complaint is lodged, miraculously, or for some uncertain reason, the member quits the board and there's no actual process done in it. Do you feel that regardless of whether one leaves a board or leaves a panel the complaint should still be heard and that it be a requirement, as many feel that they don't get a fair process and they're not vindicated in their complaint process?
What are your thoughts on that, Ms. Jacobs?