Chair, I respect that Mr. Davies has been a labour lawyer for a long time and has appeared before many judicial bodies, but I really, with all due respect, don't think that he should determine what a judge would or wouldn't say. I know that I've had the opportunity to be on the other side a few times, and lawyers tend to argue both sides so the judge makes up his mind. It shouldn't happen in this body that we determine what judges would say.
Equally, I think, it's fair enough for a court, if in fact it gets to that point, to consider the relevancy of what the minister would certainly consider. These are not black and white issues. These are issues that are in fact determined on the basis of opinion, but they're based on opinion given by officials who study them based on the law that's there.
I know the coalition will talk about the Conservatives, but these are laws to be put there for the Government of Canada, for the minister of the time. He makes that stretch that it's the Conservatives. It may or may not be his party at some time. It might be a coalition party. Who's to know?
At least those are the issues that the officials who make the references and the recommendations to the minister would have as part of their tool box, if you will. I think it's logical. I don't think we should look at them in terms of total black and white. I think the officials could tell you that they look at these issues as being what they would then pass on to the minister as a recommendation.