Then maybe Mr. Laprade can answer.
But I also want to comment on what you just said about basket clauses. I agree with you that it's not unusual to have a basket clause, but it depends upon what the wording of the basket clause is. This is not a typical one that says “and any other relevant factor”, because then a judge could actually see what was considered and make a determination about whether that factor was relevant or not.
So if the minister decided that the person's eyes were blue, and therefore yes or no, a judge would obviously say that's not relevant. But the way this is worded--“any other factor that the Minister considers relevant”--that is absolute discretion for the minister, absolute discretion to decide what the factor might be. This is a clause that in my view is attempting to circumvent and get around judicial review, which is exactly the reason other witnesses said we had this legislation: to avoid those court cases that told the minister he was not doing his job and couldn't get away with it.