Citizenship and Immigration committee  I again don't think we're in a position to comment on the RAD provisions. I think we have to limit our testimony to Federal Court procedures.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I believe so. The six heads of power as stated in subsection 18.1(4) are, of course: without jurisdiction or beyond its jurisdiction; observe the principles of natural justice; procedural fairness or other procedures that it is required to observe; erred in law in making decision—

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I'd have to say potentially yes.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  That's correct.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  That's correct.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  They would hear the motions for extension of time, motions for various aspects, but I don't believe they would hear the actual judicial review.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Thank you. Yes, for refugee cases only, let's start at year 2000, for new proceedings. In the year 2000 there were 4,490. In 2001 there were 4,067. In 2002 there were 4,986 refugee cases started. In 2003 there were 8,857 new refugee cases started. In 2004 there were 9,104 cases, and I believe you have the statistics for 2005.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  As a point of clarification, you are correct, sir, in the sense that no new evidence may be considered in a judicial review.