Very quickly, I'll refer you to our written submissions on the green paper, which hopefully are before the committee. Basically, there are two aspects of our suggestions for the things that need to be changed if this program is going to continue. One is to provide an objectively discernible basis for additions and removals from the no-fly list, or how people are being added and removed.
The issue that you're suggesting with respect to the constituent is one of identification of the person. There needs to be more detailed information on the no-fly list. Right now it's just a name. If there were more detailed information there, then there would fewer false positives. That was an issue we had raised at the time the no-fly list was created, because it created a problem when there were less identifying features or factors.
The other aspect is to have effective safeguards for people who are wrongly placed on the list, or mechanisms for people like your constituent who can then say, I'm not that guy. I'm not the person who is on the list. Here's the mechanism by which I can get....
We have this in the Criminal Code, for example, with respect to the list of terrorist entities. One can get a certificate from the minister under a certain section of the code. I would have to look it up. When you're talking about people who are listed entities under the terrorism provisions, you should be able to apply to the minister for a certificate to say, “I'm not that guy. I'm not a listed entity even though I have the same name or our organization has the same name.” Some mechanism along those lines would be helpful in addressing the types of concerns you're raising.