I'm not exactly sure how that subnational policy is going to be spelled out. I think you'd still have to look at whether there is government persecution, because there's no question that in many countries there is discrimination against particular groups.
I raised the issue that if we just used discrimination as the criteria, then we could probably take 100 million people from India alone. I'd want to see more about how the subnational group would be spelled out. I think, though, that there's certainly a clear case for having safe countries of origin.
Going back to a question that Ms. Chow raised about Mexico, when we talk about safe third countries, we are not talking about a country simply being safe. We are talking about the nationals from that country being safe from persecution by the government.
Mexico is not a particularly safe country, but the UN convention is not built around simply taking people because there are high levels of crime or, in this case, because a drug war is going on. Otherwise, we'd have to take large portions of the populations of all countries. We're talking about cases of government persecution. And you have to draw the line somewhere.