I just want to go back to the purpose of part 2 of the proposed anti-terrorism act, 2015. Part 2 actually expands the current passenger protect system. Currently, it's only the no-fly list. No-board are only applicable to an imminent threat to the aircraft itself. The purpose of the changes that we're making here with the secure air travel act is to expand that to include those who may be travelling overseas to engage in terrorist-related activities, whether it be to join ISIL, for training, whatever the case may be.
When we're talking about security being an imminent threat, the ability to travel is not necessarily an imminent threat, as in it's going to occur, that as a result of that travel there might be an terrorist attack here on Canadian soil within the next hour. It's actually something that we want to prevent from happening. It's part of our prevention. From the start we've said that the aim of this bill is about preventing planned attacks, preventing someone from travelling overseas. We've especially heard from witnesses that the biggest threat is if those individuals actually come back to Canada fully trained as jihadist terrorists. So that's what this amendment is doing.
Personally, I agree with that wholeheartedly and so does the government, as Canada does not want to become an exporter of terrorism. That is certainly not what we should be doing, that is, having Canadians travel overseas to participate in or join a terrorist organization, or to commit barbaric acts, as we've seen in the news. Certainly we don't want those individuals coming back to Canada fully trained.
I understand the intent of what you're trying to say, but I will be opposing this subamendment to our amendment.