If I may, I agree with Professor Geist that the most important aspect of the fair dealing analysis by far is fairness, but there's a reason that Canada is one of the vast majority of countries in the world that does maintain a fair dealing system. There are really only, last I checked, three or four jurisdictions in the world—the U.S., obviously, Israel and the Philippines—that have a fair use system.
Most of the world subscribes to fair dealing, and there is a reason why. The reason is that governments want to reserve for themselves the ability from time to time to assess what sorts of views in the grand scheme of things are eligible for a fair dealing type of exception, and if we just simply throw the categories open to everything such as X, Y and Z, the predictability of that system becomes far less, and it becomes far more difficult for stakeholders and the copyright system to order their affairs. It becomes more difficult to know what will be considered fair dealing or what's eligible to be considered fair dealing and to plan accordingly.
Overall, Canada has exhibited a fair sensitivity to these issues. The fair dealing categories, obviously, were expanded in 2012 and may well be expanded again in the future when the government sees fit, but I think that to expand it to the entire realm of potential dealings runs the risk of going too far.