Thank you very much for your comments.
I guess to begin I should qualify my response by saying that I'm not an expert on Canadian immigration and border control law. However, the research that I did in these three European countries led to one very clear conclusion—and that's in the U.K.: that not only were immigration laws inadequately crafted, but more importantly, they were inadequately enforced. There were simply too many cracks, in terms of not only getting into the country, but then also of people staying in the country. Part of that is also just a matter of scale.
The vast majority of the homegrown terrorism cases in the U.K. have ties to Pakistan. More than three-quarters had individuals who had trained in Pakistan, which is significant and unique to the U.K.
U.K. residents make 400,000 trips to Pakistan per year. The average duration of each one of those is 41 days, which, quite frankly, is enough time to receive dangerous training in a training camp. And yet that duration alone isn't sufficient to be able to determine the actual reasons people are travelling to Pakistan.
I think there needs to be a broad and detailed process to develop a means of tracking people, finding out when people are leaving, when they're coming back, how long they're going for, and what they're doing. They have to eliminate some of the cracks that are certainly present in the U.K.