I hope this is not a trend

I'm noticing in a draft bill proposing changes to legislation that instances of "the minister is satisfied that [X]" are slowly being replaced with "that, in the minister's opinion, is [X]" .
While the former creates an expectation that the minister has reviewed evidence impartially prepared by the department (which one can assume is largely science-based), the latter does not. So I wonder, what exactly will form the basis of the minister's "opinion" : Personal interests? Religious beliefs? Party lines? And how will the Opposition hold them to account? Where did this change come from: drafting team's own initiative, or party influence? And most importantly, how can any of this be the public interest?

posted from Bloggeroid