Ms. Sadrehashemi, we're beating around the bush on an issue here, which is that the UNHCR failed to recommend Yazidi genocide survivors to Canada through the Syrian refugee initiative and, frankly, through the GAR program after the Sinjar massacre.
You can get into the partisan politics of it. There was an audit issued. It became a campaign issue. There were failed allegations of racism. We've gone through two years of fighting on whether or not this should happen. The UN criteria always comes down; it's always used as a wedge.
I agree that there need to be objective criteria; however, in this instance, it is very clear that the list of GARs referred to Canada did not include Yazidi genocide survivors.
We've also had testimony in front of committee from Yazidis who have advocated for the program and whatnot and who are showing appointments well into the future in terms of selection process. I can't reconcile this. I don't want to make proclamations that a system isn't working writ large, but clearly the system didn't work in this situation.
Is there something this committee can recommend in terms of reforming that system so that it's still doing what it's supposed to do in terms of objective criteria, but is also being cognizant of the fact that these women can't get to camps and get on these lists, and if they did, they can't stay there. How does that system work?
This is why we advocated for a stand-alone system: we weren't getting these people into Canada. What can the UN do? What should we be advocating for in terms of the UN to reform the system so that in an emergent situation like this our asylum system is responsive to a genocide?