That's the problem, in fact.
By countries of origin, we're not specifically stating exactly what we're talking about. In itself, the act poses arbitrary problems. In addition, the criteria will be set by regulation, whereas, in the past 20 years, it has been a legislative policy, particularly in the federal government, that criteria stripping people of rights are set out in the act not in regulations.
Furthermore, I just want to take two seconds to say that, as a result of the process of shaping regulations in Canadian law, a little consultation is now possible, particularly under the Cabinet Directive on Streamlining Regulation. However, from the moment there is an amendment to regulations, consultation becomes less and less important.
So, ultimately, the government could make nice regulations in order to please everyone at the outset and, little by little, remove important elements from those regulations. That poses a problem. Simply with regard to legislative policy, the criteria should be in the act; and the process in the regulations.