Thank you, Madam Chair.
It's great to see our special guests take the time to be on TV here in a teleconference. I very much appreciate your comments. I think we're not that far off in terms of the way we're thinking here. Earlier this evening I made reference to the fact that we have to be concerned about Canada's image and the role we could be playing with regard to the whole refugee issue, which is far broader than that of any given country.
I must say that this particular government seems to reflect a lot on Australia and figures this is the direction we need to go in. A number of us are starting to say this is the wrong direction.
When we talk about detention, I think it's important to note that we do have a detention process today. In that detention process there is judicial overview, which ensures a sense of fairness. The move to mandatory detention, which the minister is proposing to do, is very new here in Canada. We hope to demonstrate to the minister that not only is that the wrong thing to do, but it's against our Constitution to be able to proceed with mandatory detention.
From what I understand in your presentation, mandatory detention had no impact on preventing boats from travelling to Australia. The only real impact has been on the annual budget for detention, which I think people need to be concerned about here.
Our border services presented the other day and indicated that the current system was working quite well.
Professor Crock, I look to you as someone who's fairly knowledgeable. No doubt you've studied other jurisdictions, and you said Canada was the best. What's your opinion if this bill does not get the amendments to deal with some of the concerns you have in terms of Canada playing that leadership role?
How is that perceived among your peers?