I'll take that a point further. Certainly the Federal Court cannot force the tribunal to review or to change decisions or anything like that. I'm not a lawyer; I'm just a simple SAR tech, but I would think there needs to be some kind of respect in a common law society where the adjudicator is the first level and they make decisions, and then the board makes decisions. When I talk about transparency, that's what I mean. The adjudicator should pay attention to decisions of the board because they might affect his decisions in future. The same applies all the way up to the Federal Court and appeals court. We expect that this is what happens. There has to be some respect in the review process.
The other part of that is why we say that published decisions are important because they are a learning tool for everybody: for the other board members, for the veterans who are applying for decisions, and for the adjudicator who looks at the initial application.
Certainly when we do a follow-up report to a systemic review report, we'll look at everything that happened in between that was not contained in the report. That will be looked into at that point in time as well.