Yes, and to further Randall's analogy of the prosecutor's deciding what evidence will be presented, what this amendment would do is it would be for the defence to decide what evidence the prosecutor has to advance. The minister's making the case. He's going to provide every bit of evidence that bolsters his case. If evidence isn't presented, it's because it's not going to be relevant to his case.
Then you have a lot of irrelevant information having to be provided, and it never ends. I don't think this is a very helpful amendment to the whole process because it mitigates against its being expeditious and fair.