Mr. Chair, I think we're talking about two separate issues. Mr. Coderre is looking at the clause having a sunset provision. My earlier question to the department officials here was about how to de-designate certain countries whose conditions have changed. The response I got back was that they routinely, automatically, have a committee in place to regularly review these countries' situations.
I would prefer to see it in the regulations so that it's not just a practice. I hope it will take place. I received an answer that they may or may not do that, but it would be good if they actually put it in the regulations to say--I would assume--that a country will be reviewed and if it no longer needs to be designated will be pulled out.
My concern is really the country, not necessarily the clause itself. I've been assured that they were planning to do that anyway, and I take their word for it. Hopefully the minister will address it and put it in the regulations so that it's clear.
In terms of whether the clause or the entire bill needs to be reviewed, occasionally we say that after a few years' time there be an evaluation of the entire thing. Sometimes we've done that and sometimes we haven't. Is it just this clause that we need to review? I'm not sure. That's not necessarily a sunset situation; all good public administration will provide evaluation. When a program gets set up, whether it be temporary foreign workers, live-in caregivers, or refugee reform, all good public servants will evaluate a program every five or eight years to see whether the program is achieving the kinds of objectives we've set out to achieve.
I would imagine that the government does so on a regular basis. If it doesn't do that, then actually it's not a good practice. Whether it be five years or eight, I would hope that there would be automatic review, evaluation, to see whether a law is accomplishing what it was planned or supposed to accomplish.
Do we need to say that? I'm not sure. Perhaps the committee can say that we will come back in five or eight years--of course, who knows where we'll be--to evaluate the entire package to see whether this has been successful or not. We could certainly do that. But I'm not sure whether it should be put into legislation.