Evidence of meeting #16 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was women.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Rathika Sitsabaiesan NDP Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all of our witnesses for being here.
Ms. Neufeld, I want to first start off by saying it seemed like you had a lot to say and you said that you were summarizing some of your suggestions. Maybe if you have your unabridged comments you could provide them to the clerk for the rest of the committee to read your entire comments that you originally were planning on saying.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Rathika Sitsabaiesan NDP Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
Thank you so much.
I want to start with Ms. Neufeld. You spoke about the broken sponsorship. If a situation of abuse happens, the agency is not a real option for the woman. You said you might have some recommendations to suggest for that? What were your recommendations for this woman who was a victim of violence?
5:05 p.m.
Representative, Canadian Council for Refugees
We have seen many cases, and we do a lot of training for other organizations on dealing with cases where there is abuse while a sponsorship is in process, and the woman either has to walk away from the sponsorship or the sponsor withdraws the sponsorship as part of the abuse. The woman's only recourse generally is a humanitarian and compassionate grounds application.
As part of that application, she has to show establishment in Canada. Often she's at a point where, particularly due to the domestic violence, she's not in a strong position to show establishment in the financial sense, in the sense of being well integrated. She may have been isolated, she may have been prohibited from taking language courses.
The United States has what's called the self-petition procedure for women precisely in that kind of situation. It was authorized under their Violence Against Women Act, which permits women whose sponsorship has broken down or been withdrawn and processed, to petition for permanent residence on their own behalf, apart from their sponsor, on the basis of the domestic violence they've experienced in the U.S. They have to show certain documentation relating to the domestic violence, but it gives them a tool to be able to safely leave that abusive situation and not have to stay in this situation of violence simply to try to obtain their permanent residence.
I would like to see something established more along those lines, rather than women having to resort to the humanitarian procedure, which also does not stop deportation, and given the long processing times right now, a woman is going to be deported long before that application even gets looked at.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Rathika Sitsabaiesan NDP Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
Yes, I've seen multiple cases where they've tried the agency route and have been removed from the country before the agency goes through, or is refused.
5:05 p.m.
Representative, Canadian Council for Refugees
Or even before the custody issues have been resolved.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Rathika Sitsabaiesan NDP Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
We had witnesses yesterday who suggested that women should receive information on the legal options available in Canada as well as the support networks, the support resources, in their first language, whatever their language might be, before they arrive in Canada, or when they walk in at the airport.
What are your thoughts on that, Ms. Neufeld?
5:05 p.m.
Representative, Canadian Council for Refugees
I think that would be excellent. I understand this does involve resources in creating that information in a wide variety of languages, but I think it would be hugely beneficial to women to have that available to them. Any chance that we can reach them better is going to be helpful. The sooner they're able to get out of a violent situation, if they are in one, means the sooner they're going to be contributing by working, by having fewer health issues related to the abuse.
I think overall even if it requires an expenditure of resources, it would still be in our interest to do so.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Rathika Sitsabaiesan NDP Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
Thank you.
My last idea is along the lines of the burden of proof.
Right now, as we understand it and how we've been advised by other witnesses, the burden of proof for the occurrence of the violence rests with the abused woman. In your experience, is it usually easy for them to prove the occurrence of the violence? Instances where there's physical abuse, if there are bruises or cuts or burns, is pretty easy to prove if you've taken a photo of it. My question also goes along the lines of psychological, financial, emotional abuse, all of those. In your experience is it relatively easy for these immigrant women to make these types of attestations or to prove this in a court of law?
I'll start with Ms. Neufeld, and then go with Madame Desloges.
5:10 p.m.
Representative, Canadian Council for Refugees
No, it's not necessarily easy for them to prove it. They need support, they need people who can assist them in gathering the evidence. They may need to obtain psychological evidence, which may be difficult if they haven't already been in counselling.
All that said, the types of evidence that are currently permitted under the domestic violence exemption around conditional permanent residence list a variety of kinds of proof. We don't know yet how many of those will be required in a given case for CIC to accept it.
I would be strongly opposed to any system that would require there be a domestic trial with a trial outcome, because there is no certainty that this trial outcome will necessarily correctly prove the abuse and, in many situations, many women are too terrified to ever approach the police. If we put that burden on them, I think the majority of abuse victims would not have obtained a domestic violence judgment, and we're far better off if there are a few people who shouldn't have slipped through, rather than having many people whom we haven't correctly helped.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
5:10 p.m.
Lawyer, Chantal Desloges Professional Corporation, As an Individual
Yes. I partially agree with my friend. The only thing I would add to that is that if there has been a trial with a negative trial outcome, I would think that this is innocent until proven guilty. However, I do agree with my friend Ms. Neufeld completely that the majority of domestic violence cases do not even go as far as calling the police or going to trial. In the absence of a trial and a verdict, I would say that these other types of evidence, they're available, but the problem is that unless the woman has an experienced counsel, she's going to have a very difficult time thinking of what to put forward in support of her case.
I think that the guidelines definitely need to be more publicized, and women need to know, even if they don't have a lawyer, what they could possibly present in terms of evidence to be able to prove that kind of a claim.
March 5th, 2014 / 5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Ted Hsu Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Thank you very much, Chair.
I'll add my thanks to the witnesses today.
For all of my questions, they are not particularly directed at one witness but they're inspired by one of the witnesses. I invite anybody to jump in with an answer.
My first question is related to Ms. Neufeld's statement that Citizenship and Immigration Canada needs to have a real person answer the telephone call, and perhaps provide telephone interpretation for somebody who has suffered abuse and needs to obtain advice. My question is, has the service level at CIC with respect to this gotten better or worse over time? Is the trend in the wrong direction or in the right direction, do you think?
5:10 p.m.
Representative, Canadian Council for Refugees
I had been trying to poll other agencies that have had these cases so far around the conditional permanent residence issue, and what their experiences have been with getting in touch with CIC. Everyone I have spoken to has had great difficulty reaching anyone at CIC. I would say, just trying to communicate with CIC at a general level, not even in regard to these domestic violence cases, the wait times are often extremely long on the phone. Often you're just on the phone for a long time and then you just get a dial tone and you have to start over.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Ted Hsu Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Is it better than five years ago or worse than five years ago? Is it hard to say?
5:10 p.m.
Lawyer, Chantal Desloges Professional Corporation, As an Individual
I think it's probably about the same. It has not gotten better. My number one advice to people is if you want information about immigration, don't call Immigration.
5:10 p.m.
Representative, Canadian Council for Refugees
Yes. That's our standard advice to everyone.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Ted Hsu Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
All right. That's very interesting.
As a related question, Ms. Neufeld, you cited the importance of making sure that immigrants have some sort of understanding of Canadian law, and in particular about the exemption to this two-year conditional period. My question is similar: do you think that the knowledge of Canadian law that immigrants have has improved over time, or is about the same, or gotten less?
5:15 p.m.
Representative, Canadian Council for Refugees
I have not seen any change over the time that I've been practising.
5:15 p.m.
Immigration and Refugee Lawyer and former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, As an Individual
I find that I have seen that immigrants who come into this country are a lot more savvy than they were when I first started my practice. That was in 2001.
5:15 p.m.
Lawyer, Chantal Desloges Professional Corporation, As an Individual
I think it depends who it is. For women who are educated, I would say yes, overall the education level in terms of immigration has gone up, and then with the advent of Internet and public information... But for women who are uneducated and unable to access it, I think it has not changed at all.
