My concern about a humanitarian claim is that you often look at the totality of the circumstances. You look at the risk of hardship, which has now come to be the accepted definition of what a humanitarian claim is all about. It's what officers are mandated to consider. It's undue, undeserved, or disproportionate hardship if they are returned to their country of origin.
The officers also look at how well settled you are here, how close your family ties are, how well established you are, and whether you're doing good for the community, creating jobs, and that kind of thing. It's the whole big package.
To tell officers that they can't consider the hardship portion or the risk portion of the case is to tie one hand behind their backs or put blinders on. I think it would make it an unrealistic and arbitrary decision. I don't think it's necessary.
I sympathize with what the minister is trying to do. It's to stop you from having multiple kicks at the same can. You can lose your risk-based claim and then make it again and again in three different places. A lot of the time, it's a multifaceted claim, and I don't think we should restrict those.