Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'd like to follow up on Mr. Bevilacqua's comments. Mention was made of people who have had a change of heart about the bill. However, there are more people who were initially on side and who have now withdrawn their support. The explanation for this, as I see it, is that this bill was initially presented as a means of reducing the backlog, when in fact that isn't the case. Investing more resources and improving productivity will help to reduce the backlog, but overall, changing the selection order of people in the queue will not really change anything.
Regarding the Canada-Quebec Accord that I've discussed with the minister, I didn't want to get into specifics at the time, but I would now like to settle this matter. Clause 188 of the bill introduces section 87.3 of the Act. In my opinion, subsection (3) is the heart of the legislative provision. It states the following:
(3) For the purposes of subsection (2), the Minister may give instructions with respect to the processing of applications and requests, including instructions (a) establishing categories of applications or requests to which the instructions apply; (b) establishing an order, by category or otherwise, for the processing of applications or requests; (c) setting the number of applications or requests, by category or otherwise, to be processed in any year; and (d) providing for the disposition of applications and requests, including those made subsequent to the first application or request.
There are no clear stipulations that these instructions would not target persons selected by the Government of Quebec. The minister said that this was not the intent of the act. If the committee wants to be sure that the current spirit of the Canada-Quebec Accord will be respected and that the minister will not be able to intervene, then a specific provision should be added to clarify that these instructions will not apply to Quebec.
Is my interpretation correct?