Sorry, but just on that, because I think this is an important point and I need clarity.... I've looked at all the reasons why the minister can deny an application. Looking at those, I try to find a way that you couldn't just use any one of those for virtually any reason.
Secondarily, how is the minister...? What process or accountability mechanism is in place? I don't see it in this bill. Maybe you can explain it to me. If the minister just says it was because of reason x, for him, or her, if the future minister is a she, to then be held accountable to explain the decision and rationalize it based on the criteria given. I don't see that accountability mechanism. Am I missing that somewhere in the bill?