Thank you, Chair.
I appreciate Mr. Weston's comments. I suppose if I were an extremely hopeful individual on this, I would ask that all of the amendments pertaining to the issue of detention be withdrawn and that we be allowed to move our amendment on this. But we have a process, and we'll follow that process.
I will say a few things about what Ms. Sims has indicated.
Mr. Weston has addressed very clearly and succinctly the issue of human rights, which I think is extremely relevant to what we're discussing here.
I would also indicate that we are not in agreement. In fact, one of the witnesses, a professor from the University of British Columbia, who is very much opposed to this legislation, confirmed and supported the fact that a queue exists. There is a refugee queue, and there is an order. There are a finite number of individuals we accept on a yearly basis. We have an obligation, a human rights obligation, to fulfill our mandate in terms of what those refugee numbers look like and who we accept on a yearly basis.
It is our opinion, and the opposition does not have to share this opinion, which they've made clear time after time after time, that allowing individuals to simply jump to the front of the line because of how they were able to achieve their arrival in Canada is simply not fair. If there's one principle Canadians understand very clearly and expect from their leaders, whether it be at the municipal, provincial or federal level, it is the issue of fairness. We think we have struck a balance in terms of how to approach the intercessions or the arrivals of these ships. And let's face it; they don't happen very often. We had a couple of witnesses who described the event of a ship arrival as something that happens once, twice, or perhaps three times a decade. It represents less than 1% of a decade of refugees who have been accepted into this country. So we need to put this whole issue in context in terms of how we have put forward the legislation.
I will say that we have listened. We've heard, whether it be from advocates from a human rights perspective, whether it be those who work directly with refugees in settlement services, or whether it be from the legal profession, and we have acknowledged that an amendment to this clause is necessary. We don't have to move any amendments. We certainly could just charge forward. But there has to be an acknowledgement, I think, whether it be tacit or otherwise, that listening was part of this process.
While I accept that the opposition has a job and a responsibility as Her Majesty's loyal opposition, there has to be an understanding that this is a government that listens. This is a committee of individuals who have decided and determined that an amendment to this clause is necessary. At the proper time, Chair, I'm going to move that amendment. And I'm hopeful that we have, as we did yesterday a couple of times, unanimous support to deal with an issue that definitely needs to be addressed.