I would add that not that long ago, schools in Quebec were running campaigns to encourage young people to say if they were gay or a lesbian. In our nation's schools, still today, some people are reluctant to say it and can feel rejected if they do. I would imagine that the situation is worse in other countries.
I have to say that your presentation was very thorough. It is not easy to come up with questions, as you covered nearly every aspect of the bill. Nevertheless, I would like to hear your thoughts on something in particular, first you and then Mr. Dogan. What happens when the process is over and the person has lost? Certain things can happen after the person's case is rejected and before they are removed from Canada. The current process includes a pre-removal risk assessment, or PRRA, which is designed to deal with that kind of situation.
Almost everyone agrees, however, that this mechanism does not work very well, that it is not very effective. A number of groups, including the CCR, have told the committee that the measure could be abandoned if there were another mechanism to allow claimants whose case had been rejected to apply to the Refugee Appeal Division to have their case reopened when the situation changed in their home country. The case would not be reopened automatically; it would happen only in rare cases. The person would have to prove that the situation had changed significantly in their home country, so much so that it could conceivably result in a different decision.
Would you agree with putting a mechanism of that sort in place? If not, what would your solution be?