Thank you. I understand the question.
With enormous respect, I think we probably agree on the outcomes we want to foster, which are safer, regular migration pathways, but disagree a little bit on the impact of suspending the safe third country agreement. It's my view that a suspension of that agreement would create the potential for more and more people to make the decision not to leave their country—people are choosing to leave their country because they are fleeing vulnerable circumstances—but to continue their journey on until they get to Canada, specifically.
My view is that we should promote the principle of people choosing to make an asylum claim in the first place where they are safe, to limit the number of people who are further putting themselves in danger by continuing on a potentially perilous journey.
I see you've put your hand up to interject.