Thank you very much. I just have a few questions.
There's no doubt that there are a great number of refugees in the world, into the millions. The question is how many you can absorb, and it becomes a numbers thing, in that sense. I know that proportionately, among other countries in the world, Canada ranks quite well in terms of the numbers we take in. I'm sure we can do better, and perhaps more, and that is something we need to look at in terms of numbers and perhaps of the effect of the safe third country agreement.
Many people have felt that in terms of general outcomes, the United States and Canada are comparable. In terms of how the process goes through it's different, but the total numbers at the end of the road are what count. In the first year's report with respect to the safe third country agreement, some of the comments made were that the objectives of the agreement are “to enhance the orderly handling of refugee claims, strengthen public confidence in the integrity of our respective refugee systems, help reduce abuse of both countries' asylum programs, and share the responsibility of providing protection to those in need”.
So there is the public interest component as well. The two have to be balanced somehow. And of course, if it were in numbers of refugees you're going to take in, there are a number abroad and a number who would make applications through the United States, and part of the reasoning behind the safe third country agreement was to deal with the public interest in the absence...or to try to do away with some of the abuse.
Of course, I realize your concern was with the issue surrounding material support and how it might have an effect on that issue alone. I wondered whether there were any other issues.
Then, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees also had input to the review and said that essentially—as far as I know, it's the UNHRC's overall assessment—“...the Agreement has generally been implemented by the Parties according to its terms and, with regard to those terms, international refugee law. Individuals who request protection are generally given an adequate opportunity to lodge refugee claims at the ports of entry and eligibility determination decisions under the Agreement have generally been made correctly.” And then the Government of Canada noted in that review that it accepted in whole or in part 13 of 15 new or outstanding UNHRC recommendations in its monitoring report.
Would you agree with me that there are two sides to that coin? There's an issue of the integrity of the system—a public interest dealing with any abuses that may take place—and then, that the two countries do have reasonably good refugee systems compared with what's happening in other parts of the world?