Let me try to add to that--and please, members, interrupt or drill down when you think it is important.
I am reluctant, both in terms of specifically trying to help the SOS Viet Phi, and more generally to try to represent or not adequately represent the position of the department, of CIC, but I believe their reluctance to recognize these individuals as refugees literally dates back to the original process that the UN led in the Philippines, where there were literally hundreds of thousands of these people, if not more. There was a process; at the end of that process, almost everybody was resettled somewhere. I think a couple of thousand were not found to be refugees.
We could argue until the cows come home whether that was the right decision and whether it was adequately done, whether the UN did a good job or a bad job. I don't think that's the point here. The department's view is that since they weren't found to be refugees then, as a matter of law we ought not to find them to be refugees now. I think that's a fair characterization of their view.
While I am a lawyer, let's not get too hung up on the legalities of this--but if you want to, under the regulations of the act there is something called the country of asylum class. I would argue that the test, which is set out there in front of you, is clearly met by not only the evidence you have in front of you in this book, but by evidence that's generally available through human rights reports, state department reports, and so forth, that these people are, first of all, stateless. Second, they fled their original country, Vietnam, for fear of persecution, and can no longer return there because they have no rights of citizenship there. They are truly stateless. They fled their country for persecution; they fled their country for reasons of civil war; they clearly meet the test of country of asylum class.
That having been said, if you as a committee don't want to go down that road, or if the Department of Citizenship and Immigration--CIC--doesn't want to go down that road, there are other legal arguments and other findings available to you. As you will know as members of Parliament--you have to deal with this every single day--the minister always has the power, under section 25 of the act, to allow someone entrance into Canada, and the test is humanitarian and compassionate grounds. We can go through that if you want.