Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Dec. 12th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

I want to clarify something to the membership so that the committee members are very clear.

Mr. McLean came to me and clearly stated that after the debate on the motion that was brought forward by Mr. Redekopp and amended by Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, he should be put first on the speaking list. Madam Kwan raised her hand as well.

From my discussions with the clerk, it is very clear that the floor should go to Mr. McLean. If there is any objection from the committee members, speak now; otherwise, I will give the floor to Mr. McLean.

Mr. McLean, go ahead, please.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Further to that, the beginning of the meeting is when we established the speaking order about when these motions will be heard. The first one has gone now. I think I was second on the list. We should maintain that decorum in how we do these things. Thank you very much.

The motion I want to put on the table has to do with the British national overseas pension.

I'll read the motion first and then describe a little of the stuff behind it.

It says:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study of pension transferability and access to the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) for Hong Kongers now residing in Canada; that the committee allocate one meeting to pursue this study; that the committee invite representatives of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, representatives of Global Affairs Canada, Manulife Financial, Sun Life Canada, immigrants from Hong Kong who have tried to move their funds from the MPF, as well as any other witnesses the committee deems relevant; and that the committee report its observations and recommendations to the House.

This I move in this motion.

I also want to go through a bit of the detail on this, because I know I have colleagues on this committee who are part of the Canada-Hong Kong Parliamentary Friendship Group. We hear a lot from groups that are very concerned about two Canadian companies in particular when certain parties are emigrating from Hong Kong to Canada. Sun Life and Manulife Financial are the ones that oversee part of this fund in Hong Kong. It is supposed to be transferred when people move overseas, but that's not happening.

We want to gain an understanding about what is happening here when only some people are able to access their pensions when they move from Hong Kong to a different jurisdiction, particularly Canada. These are two Canadian companies, obviously with Hong Kong subsidiaries. It's about understanding how this is happening and what the pressures are to make sure these people can get their mandatory provident funds out of the old jurisdiction and into the place where they're going to retire. It's very important that we have a reciprocal system so that people moving from jurisdiction to jurisdiction know the laws that govern the funds they've invested in pensions in their old country and how those come to the places they immigrate to.

Now, we know we're going to be facing more immigration from Hong Kong to Canada. This continues, and this is something on everybody's radar screen. I implore my colleagues on the other side of this committee who are in the Canada-Hong Kong Parliamentary Friendship Group to come to some resolution here so that people coming to Canada have certainty about how their funds are going to arrive from their pension funds—the savings they've been mandated to withdraw from their earnings in Hong Kong.

I can go on and explain this further if anybody doesn't understand it, but this is a service we're going to be doing for people coming to Canada. I think it's very important and will be very illuminating. We'll get some people outside the usual bureaucracy we have here. We'll get some Canadian companies in here telling us about how they operate the financial arrangements they manage between Hong Kong and Canada.

I hope this motion has been clearly stated. I will let somebody second it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

I have Mr. Kmiec and then Madam Kwan.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

The reason that this is important for this committee is that there are two Canadian companies involved in preventing this for Hong Kongers when they enter Canada with a BNO passport. They are Sun Life and Manulife. There is about $69 million being withheld from Hong Kongers.

What's happening is that when these persons come to Canada, they have temporary status. As they work through it, they become PRs, permanent residents. Once they have PR, they get a PR card. On the PR card, the first three digits show what document they used to enter the country. If they came in on a BNO passport—the British National Overseas passport—it is basically an indicator to the Hong Kong offices of these two Canadian companies as to how you came in.

Because PRC Beijing no longer recognizes the BNO as a travel document, it is now being used to deny Canadian Hong Kongers who are permanent residents of Canada or Canadians their ability to transfer from the MPF—which is their pension monies—to Canada. It's a form of transnational repression that is being used by Beijing to target Hong Kongers in Canada. This is one of these examples of transnational repression by an authoritarian regime.

The one in Beijing is the best example, but Hong Kong Watch has done a lot of work. I actually held a round table on this subject on November 23. I will also mention that the Liberal research bureau was in the room, so they have the same documents that I do on this subject.

It's related to immigration, because IRCC is the issuer of the PR card. The PR card that shows those three letters, those three numbers, at the front, indicates to the pension company, when it's making the filings in the Hong Kong jurisdiction, how they entered the country. Then that is what's being used, because of Hong Kong law, to target Canadian citizens and Canadian permanent residents in Canada who are from Hong Kong. This is why we need to call in these companies involved. They need to explain themselves. Global Affairs needs to be called in to see what they know. I know for a fact that Hong Kong Watch has been trying to get the government's attention on the matter. As far as I know, there's been no real response to it.

This is very short. This will take only one meeting, just to look into it. I know that the Hong Kong community in Canada would really appreciate it. These are people who in some cases have lost everything to come here—everything—because the Communists will either push them out or chase them all over the world wherever they go. Withholding their pension monies is a form of transnational repression. IRCC, the immigration department, is deeply related to this.

I want this motion to be passed so that we can call these companies to account. Otherwise, we're just protecting big business.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you, Mr. Kmiec.

Madam Kwan, the floor is yours.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

On this issue, as far back as June 2023, I actually wrote to the Minister of Immigration and the Minister of Finance.

Just to be clear so that people understand what the issue is about, the barrier for Hong Kongers is this: They have the inability to withdraw their retirement savings from the mandatory provident fund, the MPF. As they are British national overseas visa holders, they are legally permitted to withdraw their savings on the grounds of permanently leaving the country once they prove that they have departed Hong Kong permanently, with no intention of returning.

For those who fled Hong Kong in an effort to escape persecution from China's authoritarian control, access to their retirement savings, as you can imagine, is critical. However, these Hong Kongers are not able to access their funds if they apply for their visa application with their BNO passport.

Commanding 40% of the MPF market, Canadian banks have extensive control over Hong Kongers' financial ability to escape China's draconian policies. I call on the government to ensure that Canadian banks properly evaluate early MPF withdrawal claims. Banks like Manulife, Sun Life and the Royal Bank of Canada are preventing thousands of Hong Kongers from accessing the approximately $1.5 billion Canadian of pension savings that they're entitled to. Many have presented more than sufficient evidence, including proof of a U.K. address and a biometric residence permit, to warrant a favourable exercise of discretion on their withdrawal claims.

I think that urgent action is needed here, but I think that this is properly within the Minister of Finance's bailiwick, because it is the bank that is withholding the funds, with no justification to allow for that. I've written letters as far back as June of last year to both ministers, and I have not received a response from the Minister of Finance.

I would love to get into this. However, I am not sure that it is an immigration issue. I do, rather, think that it is a Minister of Finance issue, and I think we should pursue it. I'd be happy to work with Mr. McLean to see how we can modify this motion to try to get to the bottom of this issue, and perhaps work collaboratively with the finance committee with respect to it.

I have been on this issue. I have written about it. I have spoken with various different advocates, including Hong Kong Watch and others. I've spoken with people who have been impacted, who are unable to withdraw their retirement savings, and the implications with all of that.

This needs to be dealt with. The Canadian government needs to deal with it. However, I do believe that the avenue to deal with it is actually through finance and ensuring that the banks observe the laws that are there that allow these individuals to withdraw their funds. They have no right to withhold that funding. What is the rationale? I think that we should be calling for the banks to come before the committee to answer those questions.

Perhaps it's a joint meeting, Mr. Chair, with the finance committee, because I think it's properly the banks that should be held to account here. Most certainly, the government should be doing everything it can to assist these individuals as well, so I would love to hear from the Minister of Finance exactly what it is that she's doing, or not doing, in this regard.

I extend a hand because I think that we are in agreement that this is an urgent issue that should be dealt with. However, I want to make sure that it goes before the right committee and with the right people so that we get the proper answers that are required that will help the people to move forward on the issue, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you, Madam Kwan.

I will ask the clerk to take the vote, because there are no other speakers.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Mr. Chair—

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Go ahead, Mr. Kmiec.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

I was just going to add to that.

The document I have from Hong Kong Watch does not have any of the banks on it. The trustees I have are Manulife Provident Funds Trust Company Limited, Sun Life Trustee Company Limited and Sun Life Pension Trust Limited.

I think I heard a lot of goodwill from the New Democrats and I think we want to resolve this, but the issue is not legislation in Canada, as far as I understand it from Hong Kongers. The legislation is in Hong Kong, because when you apply, you have to provide documentation that you have left Hong Kong and you have no intention of returning. When you provide the Canadian PR card, a picture of it, that's how they're able to identify that you came to Canada and entered here through your BNO passport. This is why it's an IRCC issue.

I agree that we should invite Finance Canada, so I'm going to make an amendment to Mr. McLean's motion. After “Global Affairs Canada,” add the words “and Finance Canada,” and then it continues on to “Manulife Financial, Sun Life”, and then after the words “Sun Life Canada,” add “and financial institutions,” and then continue with “immigrants from Hong Kong”. I think that will then call all of these individuals here, and they can send the representatives they wish.

Truthfully, this is a foreign relations issue. This is a banking issue in Canada, based on what Ms. Kwan was saying; however, it is also an IRCC issue, because IRCC is essentially facilitating the identification of Hong Kongers in Canada whose intention is to stay here. They're residents or citizens of Canada. It's facilitating the transnational repression by the Communists in Beijing, so to prevent that, we have to address this issue of these three letters, digits, at the front of the PR card. That's the problem on the IRCC side.

Beyond that, I think it's an open question as to why these big businesses are facilitating transnational repression by foreign actors, by these authoritarian regimes.

That's my amendment, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you.

Madam Kwan, I'll come back to you. There is an amendment on the floor right now, so I have to deal with that first.

Mr. Kmiec, can you provide the wording to the clerk, please, so that he can read it clearly so that committee members clearly understand it?

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

I want to make sure of the wording.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Just a minute, Mr. McLean. The floor belongs is with Mr. Kmiec. I'm dealing with the amendment, and then Madam Kwan and then you.

Do the committee members accept the amendment so that we can debate on—

Go ahead, Madam Kwan.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Because I think this is an important issue, and I think we're on the same page of wanting to address it, instead of rushing through to see whether or not this amendment would actually address the issue properly and we have the right witnesses before us, I'd like to suggest that we table this—not to get to get rid of it, but to actually really work through it to make sure we have the issue properly addressed.

My understanding is that the issue here is not that Hong Kongers are violating the rule, because the rule is such that if they're leaving Hong Kong permanently, they are allowed to legally withdraw their savings once they prove they have departed Hong Kong permanently with no intention of returning. In fact, I would assume that it is the PR card that says that it is the BNO exit that, in and of itself, is the cause for the funding to be withheld. As long as they show that their intention is to permanently leave Hong Kong, they should be able to withdraw the funds. That is the law, so why are the financial institutions not allowing people to withdraw that funding? That is, in my mind, the crux of the issue, but we can work through this.

What I'm going to move is for us to table this, Mr. Chair, for the time being so that we can work through all of the nuance details and make sure we have the right language and the right people so that we can find a path to properly address this issue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you.

I'm going to see if there's unanimous consent to table it. If there's not, then, Mr. McLean, the floor is yours.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This has been tabled with this committee since November now. There has been all kinds of time for members to look at it and see if there was a way of wording it better or putting their own amendments into it.

I appreciate the comments from Ms. Kwan that were worded into the amendment brought forward by my colleague Mr. Kmiec. It clearly identifies what the problem is here.

There obviously are overlaps here between the Department of Finance, Global Affairs and IRCC. We're the immigration committee. We could push this in front of any committee, but we have the ability at this committee to call as witnesses any of these government officials and these private sector entities that are operating in both Hong Kong and Canada, and sometimes withholding the Hong Kong pensioners' money from immigrants who come to Canada.

Getting to the bottom of this quickly, I think, is better than parking it and saying, “Okay, maybe we can put some words in here or in here.” There is some openness towards the end of this motion. You'll see before “and that the committee report its observations and recommendations” the phrase “as well as any other witnesses the committee deems relevant”. We've already added in the finance department officials who are going to be involved here.

We've stated clearly what the problem is. I will reiterate that it is an immigration problem. We identify, clearly, the people who come to Canada who left Hong Kong on a BNO passport, a British national overseas passport, but once they're in Canada, they have a stamped number saying, “This is how you came over”, and that's what Manulife and Sun Life, which are the two that I'm quite familiar with, and their various subsidiaries, are using to withhold the pension transferability from the mandatory provident fund in Hong Kong to those who have become Canadians.

I think it's pretty clear what we're trying to accomplish here, and it is bringing witnesses in. If there are other amendments that we need to consider outside of the ones that my colleague has already acquiesced to in my motion—and I agree with—to make sure that it is an open and inclusive dialogue and covers all of our bases, then I'm happy to entertain them at this point of time, but I'm not happy parking this further.

Let's address this quickly. Let's get through this. Let's start this study so we can help Canadians who have immigrated here who have money due them from the Hong Kong mandatory provident fund.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Mr. Kmiec, please go ahead.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Just to clarify that this is, in fact, an IRCC issue and not a banking regulation in Canada issue, as far as I understand it. Hong Kong Watch has a document titled “Hong Kong's Mandatory Provident Fund: BNO Visa Holders Denied Access To Their Savings”. It says:

[T]he MPFA released a statement on 10 March 2021 saying that because the British National (Overseas) (BNO) passport was no longer recognised by the Hong Kong government as a valid travel document as well as proof of identity as of the end of January 2021, those trying to withdraw their MPFs early (before retirement) cannot rely on the BNO passport as evidence in support an application for early MPF withdrawal.

Because the PR cards indicate the BNO passport, that's now being used to deny Hong Kongers the ability to withdraw their savings from Hong Kong. It's not a direct finance department issue. This is really an IRCC-connected issue, because that's how these Hong Kongers are being identified in Canada as having used a BNO passport to travel.

This is this committee's issue, and I really think it's also an international relations issue, because we're essentially allowing Canadian financial institutions, the trustees—in this case, Sun Life and Manulife—to be an extended arm of transnational repression against Hong Kongers.

I would like this voted on today. If we could just have one meeting and call on these people to explain themselves as to why this is allowed to go on.... Maybe they have fixed it, but I have not heard anything about it being fixed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you, Mr. Kmiec.

Go ahead, Madam Kwan.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Can you read the amendment again, please, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Sure. Mr. Bourgault will read the amendment.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Rémi Bourgault]

It will say “representatives of Global Affairs Canada, Finance Canada, Manulife Financial, Sun Life Canada and financial institutions, immigrants from Hong Kong who have tried”. We add “Finance Canada”, and on the other line, “and financial institutions”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Mr. Clerk, can you read the whole motion as amended, please?

[The Clerk]

The motion is, “That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study of pension transferability and access to the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) for Hong Kongers now residing in Canada; that the committee allocate one meeting to pursue this study; that the committee invite representatives of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, representatives of Global Affairs Canada and Finance Canada, Manulife Financial, Sun Life Canada and financial institutions, immigrants from Hong Kong who have tried to move their funds from the MPF, as well as any other witnesses the committee deems relevant; and that the committee report its observations and recommendations to the House.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you.

We have Madam Kwan and then Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.