Here are a couple of quick comments.
First, on the content of the training specified under the Judges Act that is to be completed to the satisfaction of the commissioner, I think it might be helpful to appreciate that those really relate to different kinds of knowledge deficiencies.
The myths and stereotypes training I think is something that many people do not have and that would certainly be helpful, but you want to think about whether you're unnecessarily expending resources, for people who are versed in criminal law, to require them to demonstrate recent training in sexual assault law and evidentiary prohibitions.
On the other side, if someone is deficient in something such as evidentiary prohibitions and other basic aspects of criminal law, then that's a much more foundational training that probably needs to be ensured. For example, there's no reference to burdens of proof, which actually can become quite complicated in criminal law and can trip people up.
I guess I worry that you may be trying to do too much through what may be interpreted as a one-shot, one-size-fits-all component.
That's what I would say for now.