Bill S-8

An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations

This enactment amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to, among other things,
(a) reorganize existing inadmissibility provisions relating to sanctions to establish a distinct ground of inadmissibility based on sanctions;
(b) expand the scope of inadmissibility based on sanctions to include not only sanctions imposed on a country but also those imposed on an entity or a person; and
(c) expand the scope of inadmissibility based on sanctions to include all orders and regulations made under section 4 of the Special Economic Measures Act .
It also makes consequential amendments to the Citizenship Act and the Emergencies Act .
Finally, it amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations to, among other things, provide that the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, instead of the Immigration Division, will have the authority to issue a removal order on grounds of inadmissibility based on sanctions under new paragraph 35.1(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act .

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

With regard to Bill S-8, the legal experts and the refugee sector have said that there need to be amendments to this bill. They have called for that.

Mr. Bergeron referred to the use of the word “sanctions”. We have heard from the Bellissimo Law Group and The Refugee Centre, and they've both raised concerns about the lack of clarity with regard to language on sanctions in this bill. Of course, we have a study that will be looking at this.

Why is it so vague? How do we make sure it's better? Would you be willing to accept amendments to that?

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you all for being here today and answering our questions on Bill S-8. I'm very grateful to you for taking on sanctions. I think it's very important for us to strengthen our sanctions regime.

As Mr. Bergeron mentioned, we are going to be undertaking a study that I brought forward for us to look at. One of my big concerns with our sanctions regime, of course, is the enforcement of the sanctions regime, because it's very easy to put people's names on a list, but it's not always very easy to make sure that those sanctions are being enforced.

With regard to Bill S-8, though, I have a few questions.

Minister, you heard me being a bit critical before, when the sector or experts were not consulted. We might get to Bill C-41 later on today.

I have something that I'd like to ask for, for my birthday, Mr. Minister.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Bill S‑8 must protect the rights of refugees. It must protect the most vulnerable individuals. This bill has a specific purpose; it is in line with the Special Economic Measures Act, or SEMA. I hope you have confidence in the officials who analyze an individual's case before they are listed under the SEMA.

In short, I think there are checks and balances in place, parameters to examine all the circumstances—including any issues relating to human rights and refugee rights—in the analysis before the SEMA process is concluded.

That is one of the ways we can protect human rights and ensure that this bill is in line with the SEMA.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

The Canadian Bar Association has proposed that amendments be made to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act in Bill S‑8, to establish “a distinct ground of inadmissibility based on sanctions, namely sanctions imposed on an 'entity, person or country'”. It also recommends removing the references to “country” since the term is too broad. This is probably related to the Refugee Centre's concern.

What are your thoughts on this recommendation from the Canadian Bar Association?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Once again, I will call upon my officials for an exact and technical analysis. In practical terms, though, the analysis under the Special Economic Measures Act provides for a review of matters related to corruption or other illicit activities pursuant to international conventions. If there is evidence that meets the test criteria, the provisions of the Special Economic Measures Act apply to that person.

The goal of Bill S‑8 is to coordinate obligations under the Special Economic Measures Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act in order to make that individual inadmissible.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Canada has been a steadfast ally with Ukraine, as have been many other countries. You touched upon how this legislation, in terms of the sanctions regime, has actually helped our efforts when it comes to Ukraine.

Do you want to elaborate a bit upon that, in the 45 seconds that remain, about how Bill S-8 will further our solidarity with Ukraine and check Russia's aggression?

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

This legislation touches individuals. It also touches entities in terms of the sanctions regime. It touches not only individuals but also entities.

Is there any impact on the shareholders of entities that might be sanctioned, when it comes to Bill S-8 or the broader legislation?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I will defer to officials who have undertaken an analysis of exactly what kind of legislative or statutory schemes are in place among our democratic allies, but I believe that Bill S-8 will generally align with the approaches that have been taken by like-minded countries.

The point is to make sure there is no disconnect, that if individuals have been named under SEMA, because they are facilitating the transgression of human rights or are in some way supporting financially or otherwise the acts of an authoritarian regime, for example, Russia, as it continues its illegal incursion and war in Ukraine, those individuals then become inadmissible to Canada by operation of the IRPA statute.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Canada works in partnership with many countries, the Five Eyes, the G7 and other countries. Could you elaborate a bit on how Bill S-8 contributes to what other countries are doing in this domain? Can you speak about how other countries are addressing the issue that Bill S-8 puts forth, and how that fits in with the scheme of things?

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being here today, Mr. Minister.

Also, thank you to your staff and team for being here.

I'll pick up on the line that was really touched upon by my colleague opposite.

First off, before doing so, I'd like to acknowledge that I respect immensely the work that you and other ministers are doing to protect Canada from foreign interference and to protect our democracy.

That being said, I'd like to lean into the questions around foreign interference and ask how Bill S-8, in particular, will help to protect our country from foreign interference.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Zuberi.

I'd like to remind every member that we should try to focus our questions on the issue at hand, which is Bill S-8.

Mr. Genuis, we did stop the clock. You still have a minute and 12 seconds remaining.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

We are here on Bill S-8 today. I just want to make sure that we're getting evidence that relates to Bill S-8 at this committee, so that we can advance our understanding and even propose amendments around the legislation. I'm just trying to listen for how this actually pertains to Bill S-8 specifically. I would ask the members, through you, to focus their questions on Bill S-8.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Thank you very much for that, Mr. Chair, and for the introductions of the officials joining me.

Hello, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

Thank you for inviting me to speak about the objectives of Bill S‑8.

Bad actors will never find refuge in Canada. The amendments proposed in Bill S-8 will close the current gaps in our sanctions regime, to be perfectly clear, by harmonizing the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the Special Economic Measures Act.

The proposed amendments are clear and will ensure that all foreign nationals subject to any sanctions under the Special Economic Measures Act, or what we refer to as SEMA, will also be inadmissible to Canada pursuant to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Bill S-8 will modernize Canada's sanctions inadmissibility framework. From a border integrity perspective, the amendments proposed by Bill S-8 are the best way to ensure that a sanctioned person would be deemed inadmissible to Canada.

Since February 24, 2022, when Russia launched its brutal war against Ukraine through its latest illegal incursion, the Government of Canada has responded with numerous packages of new sanctions targeting many Russian and Belarusian individuals and entities. As of March 1, over 1,500 individuals had been sanctioned under SEMA in relation to this conflict. This is in addition to the more than 1,000 other foreign nationals sanctioned under SEMA tied to other countries or regimes, such as Myanmar, Syria and, most recently, Iran, following the so-called morality police's brutal human rights violations—just to name a few. While some of these individuals are currently inadmissible to Canada, the majority are not.

If a sanctioned foreign national arrives at the Canadian border, Bill S‑8 will guarantee that a CBSA official can immediately deny entry and remove the person from Canada.

Passing the legislation would also mean that the roughly 2,500 individuals currently sanctioned under SEMA for grounds not linked to IRPA would be inadmissible to Canada. As the IRPA is currently written, its inadmissibility provisions do not align with the basis for imposing the majority of SEMA sanctions issued against Russia, and that is precisely what Bill S-8 seeks to remedy.

These amendments will apply beyond the current situation in Russia and Iran. The proposed amendments will further facilitate the sanctions against terrorist groups and non-state entities, such as al-Qaida and ISIL.

Make no mistake. The proposed amendments will also strengthen Canada's ability to identify and stop sanctioned foreign nationals before they travel to Canada.

Simply put, there are currently no parallel existing grounds of inadmissibility, which is why the legislative amendments proposed in Bill S-8 are so crucial. They will ensure that the Government of Canada's sanctions framework remains cohesive, enforceable and responsive.

The bill will provide Canada with much-needed authorities to hold bad actors to account and to contribute to concerted action with our international allies. It will provide a clear and strong message that the Government of Canada's comprehensive sanctions framework has meaningful consequences, not only from an economic perspective but from an immigration and access to Canada perspective as well.

Thank you for your time, Mr. Chair.

I will be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

On a less happy note, if I may, I would like to ask all members to wait until I recognize them by name before they speak—unless it's Heather, of course. She has all rights today. I remind you that all comments should be made through the chair.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Monday, February 13, 2023, the committee commences its consideration of Bill S-8, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other acts and to amend the immigration and refugee protection regulations.

Concerning the drafting of any amendments that may be proposed by the members, I would like to highlight and remind everyone that members should contact Alexandra Schorah, the legislative counsel, as soon as possible should they intend to introduce any amendments.

Now, it's my great honour to welcome the sponsor of this bill to our committee. It's a great honour to have the Honourable Minister Marco Mendicino here with us. We very much look forward to his opening comments.

However, I first want to thank all the officials accompanying him today. From Canada Border Services Agency, we have Ms. Kelly Acton, vice-president, strategic policy branch, and Mr. Brett Bush, executive director, immigration and asylum policy innovation branch. From the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, we have Ms. Saman Fradette, director of migration control and horizontal policy division, and Mr. David Chan, acting director, asylum policy, performance and governance division. From the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, we have Mr. Stephen Burridge, director of sanctions, policy and operations coordination. Finally, from the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, we have Mr. Sébastien Aubertin-Giguère, assistant deputy minister, national and cybersecurity branch.

All of that being out of the way, thank you for appearing here today, Minister. For your opening remarks, you have five minutes.

Citizenship and Immigration

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, Humber River—Black Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as much as it was unexpected this morning to be dealing with this rather than the Order Paper items and the work of the government, I think it is a very important debate. I would like to see us have a take-note debate in an evening when we could talk a lot more about the issues that we are all talking about.

I believe all of us stand against this terrible regime, and stand with the Iranian community who are fighting for their freedom, especially the protesting women and students in Iran. The Government of Canada has designated the Iranian regime as a regime that has engaged in terrorism, as well as systemic and gross human rights violations. We hear about it every day on the news, the number of people who are murdered senselessly for nothing more than wanting to stand up for their freedom and the freedom of the Iranian people.

As a result, senior officials, including those from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its top leaders, are now inadmissible to Canada under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. There is an important distinction here, from the blanket covering of everyone. The government is targeting all senior officials with decision-making power, not innocent Iranians, as one of my colleagues was referring to earlier today, many of whom are actually the victims of this horrific regime.

It is an important and effective measure. We do not want former Iranian IRGC and military leaders to be able to claim asylum in our country. The designation the government has put on the Islamic Republic of Iran as a regime means that all senior officials in the country are inadmissible. This includes heads of state, military leaders, intelligence officials, senior public servants, diplomats and members of the judiciary.

To further strengthen our ability to hold Iran accountable, last May the government tabled Bill S-8 in the Senate to make changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. This legislation addresses an important gap in our framework to hold foreign governments accountable, whether we are talking about Iran or interference from China or Russia. I believe there are many countries that are looking to find ways to intimidate Canadians and Canadian parliamentarians, and to interfere in a variety of ways, which is why we are having many discussions here in the Government of Canada.

The amendments placed expand the scope for inadmissibility to Canada based on sanctions imposed on a country, entity or person. Right now, individuals, organizations, state entities and businesses named or listed in Canada's economic sanctions are not automatically inadmissible to Canada. Bill S-8 is going to fix that and tighten up the loophole that is there. It means that corrupt officials may still be eligible for a travel visa, even if they are sanctioned under the current laws.

Bill S-8 would fix this legislative oversight and empower Canadian officials to refuse visas to any Iranian regime leader, as well as any other individuals and groups sanctioned in the future. Again, this is another step forward to try to put down the kind of conditions that we want to see against Iran, and to try to help bring down the regime, ultimately, which I believe should be everybody's goal.

Bill S-8 was reported to the House in October of last year, but it is not yet before the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. I do hope, especially given today's debate, that Bill S-8 gets there sooner rather than later, so that we could strengthen all the tools we have to try to help defeat the mullahs who are currently causing such terror throughout Iran and elsewhere. We know that the Iranian mullahs are helping to provide drones to Russia to continue to help with the destruction in Ukraine. They continue to murder their own people in a very clear way.

I want to share with the House that last year I had an opportunity, together with several of my colleagues from other parties, to attend a meeting with representatives of the NCRI to talk about democracy and their quest for freedom for the Iranian people.

For over 40 years, the NCRI has been standing and protesting against this brutal regime. Their dream, and the dream of most Iranians, is to have a free and democratic secular Iran. That is what people want. That is what NCRI wants. That is what the United States wants. Two weeks ago, I believe, Congress passed the motion for House Resolution 100, which was endorsed by hundreds of congressmen and senators, supporting the 10-point plan put forward by NCRI. Again, the goal is to have a free and democratic Iran. That is what we all want to see, and an end to the brutality.

We are so fortunate to live in this wonderful country of ours and to have the freedom to come and go as we please, to say the things that need to be said, to have our freedom of speech and freedom of dress, all those things we take for granted. That is what the Iranian people are fighting for now. I think it is critically important that we, together, as parliamentarians of all stripes, continue to be their voice to continue to keep that pressure on Iran so that, ultimately, there will be many parties to choose from, whether it is NCRI or others that get together. It will be up to the Iranian people, who do not want to have a dictatorship and who want the freedom that we have. I hear that so many times: The Iranian people want what we have, that freedom of choice and the freedom to vote for whomever they want.

Currently, I am working on a letter to send out to parliamentarians to try to keep up the pressure, as many Canadians are protesting at rallies every weekend. I think it is important, if there is going to be a collapse of this regime, for all of us to do whatever we can, so I have been putting together a communication. I will summarize a bit of it, because it will go to all 338 members. It is calling for support for the Iranian people in their quest for a secular and democratic republic. It talks about the past six months and the terrible things that have happened. It acknowledges that we stand in solidarity with the people of Iran in their desire for a secular and democratic republic in which no individual, regardless of religious beliefs or birthright, has any privileges over others. Through their slogans, which we have heard many nights on the nightly news, the Iranian people have made it clear that they reject all forms of dictatorship, be it in the form of the deposed shah or the current theocratic regime, and reject any association with any of the others.

The goal here, I think for all of us, is to see a free and democratic Iran. We are looking today, in this discussion, for other ways to strengthen sanctions. Putting the IRGC on the terrorist list, yes, I support that. I am known to support that it should be listed as a terrorist organization, but I think we need to do more than that. We need to have more voices out there supporting and fighting for a free and democratic Iran. That has to be the goal, and whatever all of us can do as parliamentarians to advance that, whether it is in our own communications to each other or out to the community, I think is very important.

I am thankful for the opportunity to participate in this important debate today, and I am happy to take some questions.