I guess that's where we fundamentally disagree, Mr. Minister.
I don't see, when you read the P.E.I. and the Bodner cases—and actually some others, by analogy—how this approach by this government would be seen as anything but interference at the political level.
I'll be blunt: you're nitpicking to reduce it from the 10% to the 7.5%.
I'm not downplaying the significance of the dollar, but as I see the decisions, you have a very difficult test before our courts to override, which is what you're proposing we do as a government, as a Parliament: override the report of an independent commissioner. That strikes right at the heart of the whole issue of judicial independence.
It seems to me the criteria and explanations you put forward really amount to no more than nitpicking. The inevitable conclusion one has to draw is that it is political. It's about a political agenda that says we're going to cut back those fat cat judges, and nothing more than that.