Mr. Chair, I know it might be completely out of place at the justice committee to inject a brief view of what the law might be, but any decision—really in any tribunal, any administrative board, or any court—has, roughly speaking, four elements of natural justice that we observe in this country, in the British Commonwealth system. There are basically four.
One is that you have to know what the issue is. That has been very clear. We know what the issue has been.
Sides have the right to be heard audi alteram partem. Mr. Chairman, you did a wonderful job of letting people be heard.
When a decision is reached, you have to know what the reasons are for those decisions. And again, you've been stellar as a chairman in eliciting your reasons, so compliments to you.
It's on the last aspect. What remedy is there for a decision that's laid down? The law recognizes in various tribunals, courts, and everywhere, and at this committee, a right of appeal. That is what, by your actions, you are denying. You are abridging the rules to your own opinion and satisfaction, but you are denying the right of appeal; and for that reason, I can't....
Otherwise you have conducted, in the last two years I have been here, a stellar record on responses to all the questions I've ever had, as a member of this committee. On this one, sadly, you fail me, and you fail the Canadian justice system.