It's a very good question, Mr. Van Popta. Thank you.
There are a couple of things I would say.
Is new evidence the threshold or gateway consideration that allows you to get into this regime? No, it is not.
Does it happen frequently, particularly in the case of DNA evidence? Yes, of course it does.
However, it's not simply about new evidence. It can be about other errors that might have been committed, and I outlined some of those in my response to Monsieur Fortin.
What I would say to you is that I have confidence in the system in the way it's articulated in this bill insofar as when I look at the statistical reality of the vast number of cases—in the hundreds—that we see going through the system and being overturned as wrongful convictions in places like New Zealand, Scotland, England and Wales, it's such that we have nowhere to go but up in improving our numbers. The thing that distinguishes Canada from those other three jurisdictions is the lack of an independent commission that is separated out.
Those commissions sometimes work on the basis of months, to go back to Ms. Gazan's point, whereas in our case, because of the complexities of the case, these processes sometimes take years.
If we can work more quickly and make it more accessible, I think that at least makes options available to a future David Milgaard such that in a prison in a given part of the country, they know there's something available to them that can assist them through the process, including things like legal assistance.