I am adamantly opposed to any undue extension of the time limit. The notion, as proposed in Opposition amendments Nos. 15 and 22, that 35 working days – effectively two months – is an acceptable period in which to respond is simply not on. It is based on the misconception that leisurely time limits are in some way fairer to the applicant than clinical, crisp requirements. Overly long time limits favour only those who wish to abuse the system by dragging out the investigation process for as long as possible and who have little interest in having finality brought to their claims. Such people do a disservice to bona fide applicants whose claims for refugee status are delayed while time limits are exploited by people who are simply bent on exploiting them.