Right.
They used a failed refugee claimant as an example of why the legislation doesn't work under criminals with permanent residency in Canada. I want to be clear, because I remember going at this and the example put forward was not about someone who was actually successful in achieving refugee status in Canada, so she didn't have the type of status that.... I don't even know why they ended up in the examples; it was a little ridiculous in my opinion. It was someone who they believe should have been granted status, didn't qualify under our very fair refugee process and wasn't able to achieve refugee status, so I don't know why that would enter into the discussion around the legislation.
I will say, though, when it comes to talking about clause 9, proposed subsection 25(1), it is so clear. I'm a little unsure. I'm starting to understand, I think, the misinterpretation Ms. Sims may have with this proposed subsection. If you read it, it's very clear:
25(1) The Minister must, on request of a foreign national in Canada who is inadmissible — other than under section 34, 35 or 37 — or who does not meet the requirements of this Act, and may, on request of a foreign national outside Canada — other than a foreign national who is inadmissible under section 34, 35 or 37 —, examine the circumstances concerning the foreign national and may grant the foreign national permanent resident status or an exemption from any applicable criteria or obligations of this Act if the Minister is of the opinion that it is justified by humanitarian and compassionate considerations relating to the foreign national, taking into account the best interests of a child directly affected.
It's already there. That's what is going into the legislation. We are ensuring that the minister will be taking into account the best interests of a child. The only change that this makes, basically, is that the minister will not examine a request for humanitarian and compassionate considerations pursuant to section 25 from a foreign national who is inadmissible on security grounds for human or international rights violations or organized criminality.
I'm not interested in amendments that would allow those involved in organized crime, or those who seek to oppress human rights, the opportunity for humanitarian and compassionate appeal. What we're doing is ensuring that a very select and a named group of individuals do not have access to humanitarian and compassionate, H and C, consideration. If you take a very close look at proposed section 25, the last part of the section actually takes into account the best interests of a child directly affected. It's right there.