Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for coming here today.
It is true that this bill is extremely important because, first of all, we are talking about individuals and, secondly, the decisions we make today will have an impact on the next five to six years, even though the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has regulatory power to do things.
I would like to thank the Centre justice et foi for its wonderful proposals.
I would like to put things into perspective. I am in favour of setting up an appeal process. I have no objection to public servants being on the frontline, providing they are well trained and claimants are entitled to make a solid appeal if they are turned down.
What is problematic is this list of designated countries. This is not the Agreement on Safe Third Countries. I have already negotiated such an agreement, that is an entirely different matter. That pertains to geographic location, and it is tied to the American reality post-September 11.
You have met many victims and refugees, and therefore I would like you to talk about how these people feel. For example, how would people feel if they were singled out because they came from one country rather than another?
We hear that in Mexico the situation is good because this should be a safe country given that 90% of the claims are turned down. And yet, this country has problems with narcotraffickers, violence against women, same-sex couples, homosexuals, who are persecuted.
I would like you to tell us briefly how these people would feel, and what their frame of mind would be like. Would they feel that they were refugees or second-class refugee claimants?
Go ahead, Ms. Garant or Ms. Dionne.