As an administrative lawyer, maybe I can try to answer that question.
The minister's exercise of discretion is determined by the legislation. Under the current legislation, he must take into account certain factors; he has to. If he doesn't, then the decision can be set aside.
The purpose of this legislation is to replace the obligation to take into account these factors with a list of factors that he can take into account, as long as he.... It doesn't oblige him to take any of them into account and it allows him to take into account any other factors that he wishes. Obviously, the purpose is to give the minister much broader discretion and to try to avoid a lot of the successful challenges that have been brought—by Mr. Conroy, mostly—to the refusal to transfer prisoners.
Having said that, he would still be subject to judicial review, and if he were capricious.... I mean, the exercise of discretion would have to be based upon factors that were in some way relevant to his overall decision, so if he took into account the fact that the prisoner's eyes were blue or something that was completely irrelevant, the court would still likely intervene. This is all subject to my charter issue, but it's going to dramatically expand the discretions, so it's going to be extremely difficult.