What's strange about this process, in a way, is that if in a normal court of law a judge deems you are owed damages of $100,000, then that's what's dispensed, barring any appeal. But in this case, one can foresee the judge deeming they are owed $100,000, but with the budget they have they are only giving $50,000, and if Parliament gives more money they'll give another $50,000. Do you see what I mean? The effect on the decision is determined by the amount of money available, and because the limit may be reached, it's changing the nature of the judges' treatment of a petitioner, of someone coming before the tribunal, in terms of the money allowed. A person comes forward and says they believe they are owed $1 million and the judge tells them they probably are, but there are so many claimants and the initial report said they were going to blow through the limit right away, and the judge awards them $500,000 but tells them, if Parliament decides there is more money, the tribunal could come back and give them more money. Is that right?
On December 7th, 2009. See this statement in context.