Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
We have a few amendments that will be coming forward that deal with the so-called appeal process and the no-fly list.
I think the problem we have is that for someone who ends up on it for incorrect reasons, because of incorrect information or because of a similarity of name or birthdate, it's very difficult to find out how you got on that list and the reasons why. There may be good security reasons for that, but at the appeal level—at least once you've challenged it—you need to know what you're appealing. This amendment would require that in the case of an appeal, the appellant receive reasons for that decision.
Now, that does not mean those reasons have to be the whole file. It doesn't say that at all; it's just the the reason for that. In the absence of that, it's very difficult for people to make sense out of what's happening with them if they end up on the no-fly list.
It seems a basic part of fundamental justice that you have to provide reasons for decisions at some point. I am granting that we're doing this at the appeal level. We're not doing this when someone is listed; you send him a notice and say he's listed for the following reasons.
When someone says “I don't understand this and how this can be working”, and they get no reason for it, except “Well, we're right; you're wrong”, I think this will facilitate making this a real appeal process, along with some of the other things that are coming up here.