Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his comments. First, I would like to make it clear that we are proposing the same approach used in western Europe for the designation of safe countries.
Is the member suggesting that France, Finland, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom have an unfair, inequitable system?
That is ridiculous. We are simply proposing a tool to respond to the waves of unsuccessful claims from democratic countries that offer protection to vulnerable people.
He brought up the case of Chile. Obviously, under Pinochet, Chile would never have been on such a list because it did not meet the criteria at the time. In 2000, there was a wave of unsuccessful refugee claims from Chile, when the country was run by a social democratic government considered to be the most stable and democratic in South America. Nearly 100% of these claims were rejected. What did Canada do in response to this? It imposed visa requirements.
The current problem is that we only have one tool, which is to require visas. We need another tool to fast-track files from some countries where large numbers of these unfounded claims originate.
In conclusion, additional resources of about $240 million will help the Canada Border Services Agency do its job at the border with the United States, among other things.