I'm going to give an overview of the brief that we have submitted.
Just as a background, our clinic serves clients who, because of their social, political, and economic situations, face multiple problems in their lives. We have served thousands of immigrant workers and workers from racialized communities who find themselves ghettoized in low-waged, non-unionized jobs and who face exploitation by employers who have very little regard for their rights. We have also served hundreds of immigrant workers who are non-status, but who contribute to the economic development of our country nonetheless, without receiving any benefits in return.
However, all of these individuals are now facing even greater challenges as a result of new cuts to certain federal government programs designed to assist them. These cuts, as announced by this government on September 25, 2006, will have a disproportionate impact on those who are the most marginalized, among them, immigrants, persons from racialized communities, and persons with disabilities.
Our written brief, and therefore my oral brief, will focus on three issues: first, the issues and concerns of immigrant workers and workers from racialized communities; second, the issue of non-status immigrant workers; and third, the elimination of the court challenges program and its impact on our communities.
While the gap between rich and poor in Canada is generally widening, the impact of this growing gulf is being felt much more profoundly by certain racialized groups. In the Toronto area, for example, racialized group members are three times more likely to live in poverty than are non-racialized group members. In the words of Professor Grace-Edward Galabuzi, at Ryerson University, we have created an economic apartheid in Canada.
Among those most vulnerable are the immigrant workers who find themselves exploited by employers who disregard their rights with impunity. It is not uncommon in our practice to see employers simply file for bankruptcy protection rather than pay their employees' owed wages and termination pay. Many workers who have lost their jobs find the door to EI benefits closed due to the restrictive eligibility criteria and the outright disentitlement for workers who quit their jobs or are fired for misconduct, even though they may have left their employment due to discrimination and harassment.
To address these two issues, we have recommended the following: first, develop a national framework of action and an implementation plan to address the issue of racialization of poverty and inequitable access to employment opportunities faced by immigrant workers and workers from racialized communities; second, proclaim Bill C-55, which gives workers priority over all other creditors in their claims for unpaid wages and bankruptcy proceedings filed by their employers; third, as proposed under Bill C-55, establish a wage-earner protection fund to cover wages owed to workers by their bankrupt employers; and fourth, amend eligibility requirements under the Employment Insurance Act by loosening the disentitlement provisions and by reducing the required insurable hours to make it easier for casual and part-time workers to have access to a decent amount of employment insurance benefits.
Turning now to the issue of non-status immigrants, there are an estimated 200,000 to 500,000 individuals living without status in Canada. Their existence is the result of inequities created by an immigration and refugee determination system that is fundamentally flawed. Our economy relies on the labour readily provided by non-status immigrants, yet we fail to provide them with the benefits that other Canadian workers take for granted.
To address this issue, we recommend that the standing committee call on the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to immediately put in place a process to regularize the status of non-status immigrants. In the meantime, we should seek to amend the Employment Insurance Act to allow all workers who have contributed to EI premiums, regardless of the legality of their status, to receive EI benefits when they become unemployed.
Finally, there is the issue of the court challenges program. On September 25, 2006, the Government of Canada announced $1 billion in cuts to various federal programs. Of course, there are many issues that can be addressed, but I'm just going to focus on one of them, which is the elimination of the court challenges program.
Established in 1978, the court challenges program has been a key source of support for individuals and groups seeking to enforce their equality and language rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Cases that have been brought forward with the support of the program include Canada v. Lesiuk, which looks at the constitutionality of the EI eligibility requirements from the perspective of women with child care responsibilities.
The program has also supported advocacy groups in challenging policies and programs that negatively affect persons with disabilities.
The UN bodies have recognized the court challenges program as an important instrument that advances the rights of minority groups, including persons with disabilities.
The elimination of the program will make it more difficult for disadvantaged groups to enforce the rights that they're supposed to enjoy under our constitution.
We recommend, finally, that the standing committee call on the Government of Canada to immediately reinstate the program and to restore full funding to the court challenges program.
Thank you.