Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her work on these issues as the critic for her party on immigration and refugee issues and for her speech.
I want to ask her a question. We heard from the government side that it does not accept the fact that these people are refugees. I certainly do not accept that analysis, as I indicated in my speech, but I want to run this by the member and ask for her comment. The United States has resettled the bulk of the 2,000 people, and in its agreement with the Philippine government, there is an important line. This document was provided to the standing committee.
That document between the United States and the Philippines states:
In an effort to offer resettlement to as many of those in the group as possible, the United States will apply a generous refugee-screening standard when conducting interviews.
Thus, even though it may not have been a strict refugee program, the standards that are being applied are refugee standards. However, when we look at the actual visas that were provided to the folks going to the United States, we see that the first line on the confirmation letters they received states:
Your application for refugee status in the United States has been conditionally approved under S[ection] 207(a) of the United States Immigration and Nationality Act.
Similarly, in Australia when the stateless Vietnamese refugees in the Philippines received their confirmation letters, the first line said:
I refer to your application for Refugee subclass 202 visa, and am pleased to advise that...a decision was taken to grant you and your family that visa.
Clearly the United States and Australia have both made provision in some way to see these people as refugees or to bring them in directly under their refugee programs. I wonder if the member could comment on why Canada cannot make those kinds of provisions as well.