Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank all of the witnesses not only for being here today but for all the work they've done over the years to help families and victims who've found themselves in a very difficult situation. I'm also humbled by the presence of Mr. Fowler.
Mr. Fowler, I'm grateful for your service and very delighted that you're here with us safely.
I don't subscribe to the idea that our current policies—or the execution of our policies as a government—are perfect, nor do I subscribe to the idea that there's no opportunity for additional reform or for the introduction of new legislation, for that matter. I think there might be room for additional tools.
My concern is that this current proposal doesn't do what it's intended to do. I question whether these new tools would help get a Canadian citizen or someone in the difficult situation of either arbitrary detention or hostage-taking out of harm's way. I also worry that it raises unreasonable expectations, to a degree that the government will be unable to fulfill them. Many Canadian families who have loved ones in a difficult situation may start expecting the Government of Canada to use these new tools at their disposal, but, really, they're without an appropriate application.
I'm going to start my questions with Ms. Teich.
I have concerns about expanding eligibility to non-Canadian citizens, particularly protected persons. Who decides who is a protected person? I know the definition of “protected person”. In Canada, we have the IRB deciding whether a claimant is a protected person or not. If someone finds themselves in a difficult situation abroad and they're not at home, who defines them as a protected person?