Thank you, Madam Chair.
I have the same concern as my colleague Mr. Caputo. I don't think any of us want this judicial review commission to become an alternative court system.
Mr. Garrison was saying just a few minutes ago that those who are least able to hire a competent lawyer—for example, those who don't have the resources to do that—are the ones we want to help out. In response I would say those are good arguments for improving our traditional trial court system, maybe with better legal aid funding and by ensuring that every person who's charged with a serious offence has competent counsel. I think we're all very interested in our criminal trial system functioning properly and coming to the right decision.
Our system is an adversarial system. The judge's job is to hear the evidence, to give direction to the jury and to allow the jury, then, to make the decision. This is not an inquisitorial system. It's an adversarial system.
The judicial review commission will be more inquisitorial and will have the resources to do investigations. That's a good thing, but what we don't want to happen is that it becomes an alternative or parallel criminal justice system so that a person convicted can decide whether they go through the appeal process or go directly to judicial review. I think that's what we want to avoid.
Whatever amendments my colleague Mr. Caputo might come up with, I'm certainly interested in hearing them.