Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank our guests for being here today.
Professor Cappe, I do agree 100% with what you said. Based on our offices, you can't determine whether a program is working or not.
My very first call as a member of Parliament was a woman with an accent, which I now understand as South African, but I wasn't sure at the time; I thought it was English. Her question was, “You people are evil. You won't let my mother come and visit us. She couldn't get a visitor visa.”
Naively I said, “So when did you come to Canada? You came as a landed immigrant?” The individual told me, “No, I came on a visitor visa and stayed.” I politely said, “Your mother likely isn't coming then.”
I think your point is well taken. Your point on the piece of what the criteria are I think was important. I'll be frank. My position is that the criteria are likely to make sure people who are legitimately coming here will be leaving at the end of their visitor's time.
Based on your experience as a chief bureaucrat here on the Hill.... My guess is that the individuals who are working for us in other countries don't get a lot of credit for allowing people to come here legitimately. They will get a lot of crap if they let people in here who end up staying, and so on. There might be a propensity for them to be very tough on allowing people here and following the criteria that's set out. And we do get a copy of what boxes are checked.
Do you have a suggestion from a bureaucratic point of view on how to improve that system, to allow that decision-making to be better?