The increased burden on the courts largely comes from legislation from a previous government that was read down quite significantly in some court cases.
Sometimes legislation to eliminate burdens on the courts can result not only in unfairness but in increased burdens on the courts, and it's particularly problematic.
The case of expert evidence will be before the Supreme Court, so we may have an answer on it, and I may be proven wrong very quickly in my analysis. But there is a danger to having a judicial abdication of that gate-keeping function, especially when the expert evidence at issue—maybe before a jury, maybe highly persuasive, maybe overly-relied upon—is the cause of many wrongful convictions. In these regulations, of course, we're not able to examine that expert qualification, and it's also outsourced by regulation to an entity completely divorced from any court oversight.
That is a large abdication of the judicial gatekeeping function that has been so necessary and has been reinformed again and again by our appellate courts.