Thanks. I think I listed them in the order of preference. I think the simplest, but also the most effective, is to get rid of subsection 33.1(2). Judges know how to apply a marked departure standard. They've been doing it for decades in other criminal contexts, like criminal negligence. My preference would be to get rid of it altogether.
The second choice would be to clarify what the standard is but also to reiterate that the burden of proof in showing that something wasn't foreseeable should be on the accused and not on the Crown.