I think it's twofold. There has to be a demonstrated material change. It can't just be the current system now whereby, for instance, with Munro, as soon as he's denied parole on the first hearing he has already booked his next hearing date. Where is the material change? Where does that come forward? It has to be significant.
How do you demonstrate a material change when you don't have any information and they are all shrouded in this privacy interest?
You asked a great question to Ms. Lee, because with Munro, for instance, as I said earlier, one of the triggers for his homicidal and anti-social behaviour was drugs or alcohol. He had some prison issues and that was not disclosed. We had to find that out. There was no transparency there.
When you have a violent murderer, a sadist who is triggered by drug use, sure enough, they give him an escorted day pass. They revoked that, the escorted day pass, and gave him an unescorted day pass. His parole got revoked, and we are trying to get information about why. It is such a closed shop when it comes to victims. Victims are kept way outside it.