Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Welcome again to all of the witnesses.
I'd like to pursue the NDP line of questioning a little bit, in a slightly different way. I think that we have been concerned in these committee hearings about an imbalance of power between the one who is sponsored and the person doing the sponsoring. Both in terms of the conditional permanent residence for marriage.... The person being sponsored—if there's a breakdown—risks being deported, which is a clear imbalance.
I guess I'd like to repeat the question asked earlier, but ask each of you for a brief yes or no answer, because I've asked this to other witnesses. If you had a choice between keeping the status quo with the conditional permanent residence as one option, or abolishing the conditional permanent residence and going back to the old system, where the person came in automatically as a permanent resident, would you prefer the status quo or the old system?
I think the advantage of the old system is that you prevent this imbalance in power. The advantage of the status quo may be that you reduce the number of illegitimate marriages coming into the country, although that is the job of the immigration officials, to determine whether it's a legitimate marriage before they let the person in in the first place.
I wonder if you're comfortable doing this, if each of you could just say, would you like to abolish the conditional permanent residence system and go back to where we were, yes or no?