Evidence of meeting #16 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was removal.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Would we have to say that we're talking about a fairly small number? Would that be fair to say?
4:05 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I think that would be fair to say.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
I know there's a concern about multiple applications, but from what I'm hearing, if one application isn't determined in 60 days, you make it a point between the two departments to expedite it. If you removed the idea of multiple applications and just dealt with the particular case, is there any reason why, as a matter of policy, the removal couldn't be withheld until the expedited process on that particular application is completed?
4:05 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I'm sorry, I think I'm—
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Is there any problem with just having it a matter of policy?
4:05 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Having it a matter of policy instead of using the--
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
No, no, have the expedited process, but once you expedite the process with respect to that application but not the subsequent applications, holding the removal until it's decided.
4:05 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Rather than the 60-day window?
4:05 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Again, I think that is something we'll take back to have a look at. As I say, the 60-day window was put in place initially as a time window that people reasonably expected would be adequate to fully make an approval in principle decision.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Now the approval in principle decision primarily is the about genuineness of the relationship, I would gather—and maybe some ancillary matter, but that would be the key point.
4:05 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Indeed, it would be that and the window time to determine whether there was a significant, compelling security risk at play.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
The approval in principle is a sort of stage one, and that takes the five or six months. The screening for criminality, security, and health takes place...?
4:05 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
After that.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Is there any reason why the health and criminality screening couldn't be done up front, as opposed the decision being taken when the application is approved in principle? It seems to me that if we have someone approved in principle but still have security concerns....
As I understand it, once you're approved in principle you can get working permits and study permits, and the security and criminality issue is not yet determined. So you won't remove those, but you might remove some for whom they haven't yet determined the approval in principle.
Is that not a reverse process to what it should be?
4:10 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I think the reason we do it in that order, as we do in the processing of any application, is that there are a lot of requests for screening, just in the nature of the business that we do, so there's a demand on the system. Our approach to processing applications is to determine whether we have a valid application before us before we go to the time and effort of doing the subsequent in-depth security and medical screening, because to do that for an invalid application would be using resources that could be better devoted to other matters.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
In those applications in principle, if there were a valid status of some kind, whether it's a temporary resident visa, a temporary resident permit, or some other permit that's expiring, while you're considering the application in principle, does the extension happen automatically if the decision has not been made in principle, or does one have to justify the extension?
4:10 p.m.
Director, Social Policy and Programs, Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
The extension of a temporary status is the responsibility of the applicant, so they would extend the status, maintain their status in Canada, until their decision was completed.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
If there is an application made and a decision has not yet been made in terms of acceptance in principle, would there be any reason not to extend the existing basis for being here?
4:10 p.m.
Director, Social Policy and Programs, Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
No. It's usual practice to extend temporary status for those individuals in that circumstance.
4:10 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
On the same terms and conditions.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
The biggest issue we're dealing with is those who have no status and whose application in principle has not yet been approved.
4:10 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Correct.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Those are the ones that you expedite in any event, and it seems the majority of them would probably not be subject to removal pending a decision being made one way or another.
4:10 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Yes. That would be a fair conclusion.