Citizenship and Immigration committee  I just want to back up what Geraldine is saying. I agree with you that there needs to be an end to a process, but a process is defined by what you are engaging in at certain points. If you had a meaningful appeal at one point in the process, you wouldn't have four or five steps later to deal with pieces of the pie.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes, I think you are right. What the bill would allow is for any application to be disposed of or retained, but not necessarily to be decided, on the substantive merit of the application, which in effect would eliminate any appeal mechanism. That is a very dangerous way to go.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I have a quick comment. In terms of the RAD, clearly any appellate mechanism or review mechanism would be a welcome addition, as long as it doesn't compromise any review mechanisms earlier on in the process. I underscore and appreciate the passion on that issue, but I would also like to see that passion expressed toward the issue of undocumented workers.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes. First of all, there needs to be some correction in the system. It has to be debated. Just to give you a quick example, picking up on the point about overseas agencies, the Supreme Court of Canada maintained two provisions under the act, section 117 and paragraph (9)(d), and certain exclusionary provisions as constitutional because of the opportunity to have a section 25 relief.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I'd like to thank the committee for the invitation and for the wonderful work it has undertaken on behalf of Canadians and future Canadians. I provided a nine-page report, or speaking notes, which will be made available in a few days. The basis of the report is eight points, only a few of which I will have the opportunity to touch upon today.