I would like to make another comment about the acceptance rates. The question comes up often. We would be pleased to provide the committee with the acceptance rates for each country and the variations for various regions, because we do have those figures. I would like to draw the committee's attention to the fact that this may be one of the least reliable measurement tools. Actually, I would stress that the best guarantee of a good decision are the reasons in support of the decision, not a figure taken randomly for a particular region. And as Mr. Jobin said, each case is different, and a good decision has nothing to do with the region or the country of origin of the claimant. We are dealing with people, not with countries. We have to listen to what every individual has to say, and disregard what the country represents to us.
I have had an opportunity to make some comparisons, because the acceptance rate was varying depending on the region. I noticed that an important factor in the variation had to do with the fact that the history of the various regions was completely different. For example, in Montreal refugee claimants from Kazakhstan were rejected, while they were accepted in Toronto. When we analyzed this on a case-by-case basis, we realized that the history was completely different in each region.
So you have to be extremely careful when you talk about acceptance rates. They are a very poor reflection of what happens in the hearing room.