Bill C-31 (Historical)

Protecting Canada's Immigration System Act

An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act

This enactment amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the Balanced Refugee Reform Act to, among other things, provide for the expediting of the processing of refugee protection claims.
The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act is also amended to authorize the Minister, in certain circumstances, to designate as an irregular arrival the arrival in Canada of a group of persons and to provide for the effects of such a designation in respect of those persons, including in relation to detention, conditions of release from detention and applications for permanent resident status. In addition, the enactment amends certain enforcement provisions of that Act, notably to expand the scope of the offence of human smuggling and to provide for minimum punishments in relation to that offence. Furthermore, the enactment amends that Act to expand sponsorship options in respect of foreign nationals and to require the provision of biometric information when an application for a temporary resident visa, study permit or work permit is made.
In addition, the enactment amends the Marine Transportation Security Act to increase the penalties for persons who fail to provide information that is required to be reported before a vessel enters Canadian waters or to comply with ministerial directions and for persons who provide false or misleading information. It creates a new offence in respect of vessels that fail to comply with ministerial directions and authorizes the making of regulations respecting the disclosure of certain information for the purpose of protecting the safety or security of Canada or Canadians.
Finally, the enactment amends the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act to enhance the authority for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to enter into agreements and arrangements with foreign governments, and to provide services to the Canada Border Services Agency.

[Les Linklater]

Well, as I said, in terms of rejected claimants, under the new system that's coming on stream toward the end of the year under Bill C-31, we estimate taxpayer costs at about $29,000 a year for a failed claimant. If we're able to address a number of those issues, particularly from countries that are visa free—Hungary for one, where we do have a large influx or have had a large influx of refugee claimants from a country without a visa—the eTA is another tool to help us manage those pressures as well.

[Les Linklater]

We see where other countries are going, particularly the United States, which has had ESTA since 2008, with good success and from which we are learning. A clear example would be issues related to refugee claimants. Under the current system, we estimate the cost to Canadian taxpayers for a rejected claimant runs up to about $50,000 a year with regard to access to social services, welfare, and that sort of thing. With the new system that's coming on board later this year, further to Bill C-31, we would expect those costs to go down, given the shortened period of time that individuals are in Canada, but it's still a significant amount, $29,000 or $30,000 a year.

With eTA, if there are questions around legitimacy of traveller intent and an eTA is refused, then that's a cost avoidance of $30,000 per refugee claimant under the new determination system.

Citizenship and Immigration

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in my second petition, the petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to repeal Bill C-31, which they call the punishing refugees act, and return to the framework of the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, passed with the support of all parties in the previous Parliament, as the current bill, Bill C-31, concentrates way too much power in the hands of one minister.

[Richard Goldman]

Please read very carefully the sections that we cite at footnote 5. She is caught by proposed paragraph 35(1)(a). The proposed subsections that you just mentioned do not apply to proposed paragraph 35(1)(a). She cannot ask for ministerial relief. Persons who are excluded from protection under article 1F(a) of the convention and therefore inadmissible on proposed paragraph 35(1)(a) have never been able to apply for ministerial relief. They have been able to apply for permanent residency on humanitarian grounds. Bill C-43, under clauses 8 and 9, is taking that away. We didn't talk about it under Bill C-31. Bill C-31 didn't take it away. Bill C-43 is proposing to take it away.

Moving to the—

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

You're making my argument for me. She actually, then, has the opportunity under Bill C-31 to apply for H and C—

[Richard Goldman]

She does. This legislation does many things.

One of the things it does is it takes away the right to apply on H and C grounds for permanent residence of people who are excluded under section 35. As it's explained in our brief, by being excluded from refugee protection under article 1F, she is automatically excluded under section 35. Our citations are there. The sections of the law are there. It's all there. The reason we didn't raise this when we came on Bill C-31 was that Bill C-31 didn't take away the right of people like Salma to apply on H and C grounds. This piece of legislation, under clauses 9 and 10 of Bill C-43, does take away her right to apply for permanent residence on H and C grounds. That's—

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

I'm intrigued by your example. I suppose we're all using them to make our points here on the bill, and I appreciate that. I think all of us have the ability to do that and should be allowed to use examples to explain what we're talking about.

Salma, the person you're talking about—which is not her real name, but I understand the need to protect her—wasn't a permanent resident. She was applying for refugee status. You're relating a case that you could have presented under Bill C-31, when we did our hearings on that bill. I'm not sure why you're presenting a case of a refugee on Bill C-43, which specifically deals with those who already have permanent residency. She doesn't have permanent residency. If she was coming from a foreign country and was applying to come to Canada, and if she had been convicted in her own country or charged and it was believed to be true, she would not be admissible to Canada, but she could actually go to the Federal Court to try that. She could also apply under H and C because she actually isn't in the country yet.

I'm not sure why you're bringing this case in under Bill C-43. She's applying for refugee status, so she's not a person who falls under this piece of legislation. She'd fall under Bill C-31.

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition on behalf of voters to rescind Bill C-31, which, as we know, will restrict immigrants' rights and refugee claims and will give more and more arbitrary powers to the minister responsible.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I also have another petition signed by hundreds of people who live in my riding of Scarborough—Rouge River and who are calling for the repeal of Bill C-31, which they are calling “the punishing refugees act”.

Because Bill C-31 concentrates more power in the hands of the minister by allowing him or her to name safe countries for refugees around the world and restricts access to humanitarian and compassionate consideration, the undersigned petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to repeal Bill C-31, the punishing refugees act, and to return to the framework of the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, passed with the support of all parties in the previous Parliament.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I'm going to introduce our guests.

We have Barbara Jackman, who is an immigration lawyer. She's been here before on Bill C-43.

We have Robin Seligman, who is an immigration lawyer as well. Hello again.

We have David Matas, who has also appeared before, on Bill C-31. Good afternoon to you, sir.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

As a fellow parent, Ms. Rosenfeldt, I want to thank you for being here, and more importantly, for your service to our country. Congratulations on your recent recognition in receiving the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal. It's an honour to have you with us today.

Mr. Bissett, thank you for coming back and for your very clear testimony. It's been useful for us to hear.

Let me first touch on the use of humanitarian and compassionate grounds, which have been used to shelter people who come to Canada as war criminals and are able to use that shelter to delay their deportation.

Can you comment further on the provision in Bill C-31 that is designed to remove the ability for someone who is an acknowledged war criminal to delay deportation?

[Andrew Cash, NDP, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to submit a petition on behalf of residents of Toronto, over 50% of whom were not born in Canada.

The petitioners continue to express serious concerns about Bill C-31 and, among other things, the dividing of refugees into tiers based on their country of origin and unnecessarily punishing them as a result.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

All right.

What I'm going to do is ask the clerk to ask her. She's no longer before us. She's still here, so we will ask the clerk whether that information could be made available, and I'm sure it will be.

Mr. Brouwer, finally we get to you. You're a familiar face. You've been here several times, on security and Bill C-31.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you very much.

Minister, it's really good that you can be here for two hours today. I know you have a very busy schedule and a very active file that keeps you and the rest of us busy.

Minister, I believe all Canadians want a tough approach to non-citizens who commit serious, often violent crimes in our communities. Newcomer communities, the vast majority of whom are law abiding and follow the rules, would be among the first to agree with this sentiment.

As you know, I made it clear when this legislation was introduced that as a responsible opposition we are ready to work with the government to ensure that criminals of all backgrounds are not allowed to abuse our appeals process. But I want to make it clear to you today that our support in principle at second reading is not a blank cheque, and I am serving notice to you today that we expect the government to work with us to make sure that we protect Canadians and respect due process and the rule of law at the same time.

I will be blunt. We have serious concerns about the bill being proposed here. We are concerned with both its effectiveness in dealing with the issue of non-citizen criminality as well as its extraordinarily wide scope. In particular, Bill C-43 grants you sweeping new powers. The last thing your immigration system needs is to be criticized even more. The reality is we have a good independent system for determining admissibility, and we don't need it to be replaced at the whim of any minister.

What you've handed out here today, the handout we've just received—and just taking a cursory look at it, what struck me is that what you've handed out here are just guidelines. They will still be guidelines to you, with the discretion resting with you or with another minister.

Three times since I became the official opposition critic for immigration on refugee health cuts, on Bill C-31, and again on this legislation, you have introduced sweeping reforms only to have to backtrack under pressure. It is a clear sign that these reforms are being rushed through without proper consultation. We are hoping that on this piece of legislation you will be willing to listen to the stakeholders and the opposition to ensure that we have a piece of legislation at the end of the day that protects both Canadians and the rights of newcomers.

I notice, Minister, that your presentation gives some examples of some very egregious cases, which we agree with you we would want to have removed. However, I always hesitate when we make sweeping changes based on a few anomalies, instead of trying to attack those specific anomalies by fine-tuning the system.

On the note of consultation and listening to the opposition, my first question to you relates to your comments in the media last week when you promised to engage members of this committee on the section of this law that would allow you to bar foreign nationals from entering Canada for overly broad public policy considerations, which, I think even you must agree, captures almost everything in the world. While we appreciate the olive branch, my question is, why do we need this at all? Our border services already have the power to bar people who are a threat to our security or whose actions constitute crimes, including hate speech in Canada.

Would you be open to scrapping this ill-considered part of the legislation?

Border Crossings

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, in fact Bill C-31 is just coming into force. We have not yet taken any of those measures that the act provides for.

That member opposed Bill C-31. In fact, his website says that he opposes Bill C-31 and now he is calling upon the government to implement Bill C-31. That is the kind of hypocrisy that he should be going home and telling his constituents about, that on the one hand he supports Bill C-31 but on the other hand he does not.