I'd like to make a few points.
Certainly I was present when they made the presentation, and there's no question that the presentation was a compelling one and the number remaining is not huge. As I recall from the presentation, there were two possibilities for them. One was to apply under the country of asylum class, or to have the minister exercise discretion on humanitarian and compassionate grounds under section 25. He would have to require that kind of intervention. And certainly the minister and department have met and heard representation.
In my view, when one is exercising discretion, although it's discretion, it obviously needs to be exercised with compassion, but on an objective basis. It's not meant to be sort of a catch-all phrase that takes everything into account. When you look at where a number of groups are in relation to this particular case, they would either qualify for similar kind of treatment or have a basis for it. When you look at it from that perspective, it becomes problematic for the minister to be exercising that kind of discretion in this case.
For this reason and also for the fact that they can still apply under the country of asylum class, and some of them have married Philippine nationals, there is legislation before the house in the Philippines, I understand, a particular bill to regularize them. It's been approved by the house committee on justice and it's scheduled for plenary debate. The process is there and I think there's potential for amnesty to be gathered there.
Initially when there was a provision made for sponsorship through family class, and they extended the family class, the uptake was not very high, and we find that those who are left don't easily fall into the category that we would like to utilize. For that reason, we would oppose the motion as it is presented. I certainly would be open to have them applying under the existing provisions, other than the section 25 that's referred to in the motion.
Realistically, when we're looking at these cases, I think every time a discretion is utilized in whatever case it might be, it has to be looked at on an objective basis with certain underpinnings, and you have to at least either qualify within that realm or come close to it where that consideration can be given.
I appreciate the circumstance, and hopefully there can be a resolution and outcome that provides some satisfaction. But for those reasons, we must oppose it.