Evidence of meeting #33 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was safe.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:15 p.m.
Co-Director, FCJ Refugee Centre, As an Individual
I want to clarify that in Canada there is no appeal for refugees. The law has it, but it hasn't been implemented yet. I just want to clarify that.
You may talk about different programs to which a person may apply under different criteria, but the appeal hasn't been implemented by the government yet.
12:15 p.m.
Clinical Professor of Law, Immigration and Refugee Program, Harvard Law School
The main administrative appellate body was decimated five years ago by regulations that were promulgated by the Attorney General at the time. Its membership was cut in half, and it was basically instructed that it had to affirm immigration judges' decisions, except under exceptional circumstances.
As a result, almost all these cases are now going to federal court. The federal courts are overwhelmed, and they are starting to shut their doors.
I just want to quote something. This is Judge Posner from the Seventh Circuit. There have been a barrage of these comments from the federal judiciary about the quality of justice at the administrative level.
Judge Posner is actually politically conservative on the U.S. spectrum. He commented:
—adjudication of [immigration] cases at the administrative level has fallen below the minimum standards of legal justice.
That kind of comment is echoed in similar comments of other members of the federal judiciary.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Nina Grewal Conservative Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Please, could you tell us what the acceptance rates are for asylum applicants in the United States and what the equivalent acceptance rates are here in Canada.
12:15 p.m.
Clinical Professor of Law, Immigration and Refugee Program, Harvard Law School
This is the UNHCR's 2005 report, and this is where I might dispute some of the statistics Professor Martin presents, which are not publicly available statistics. In Canada, the recognition rate was 50.4% overall; in the U.S., 34.7%.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
You have 35 seconds left.
We'll be a little bit flexible on that, but after that I'm going to have to strictly mark time, because we have four more people who want to get five minutes in and we have to suspend at about 20 minutes to the hour.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
You're okay? Okay, thank you, Ms. Grewal.
We'll try to stick to our five minutes, because I want to get everyone in who hasn't asked a question yet.
Madame Faille, go ahead.
12:20 p.m.
Bloc
Meili Faille Bloc Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC
I believe the principle in play here is how we treat those who come here. This is also a reflection of our openness and generosity as a society. As for the implementation of the agreement, according to what I can see in the field, looking at organizations who deal with the settlement of Columbians in Quebec, the alignment of Canadian policies on those of the United States deprives Quebec and Canada of refugees who offer a great potential, who integrate very well into our society. If we consider, for example, the Latin American community, in Quebec, these people settle mainly in the regions. This is very important for our regionalization policies. We are excluding a community which integrates very easily into our society. This also means a loss of economic potential that these people bring with them. I find it very regrettable that the agreement allows fewer people to immigrate to our country.
As for family reunification, it is also a challenge here in Canada. You mentioned earlier the difficulty stemming from the one-year deadline, but we need also to look at the difficulty in bringing the family together. The definition of family is very restrictive, from what I understand.
Would you recommend a widening of this definition?
12:20 p.m.
Clinical Professor of Law, Immigration and Refugee Program, Harvard Law School
I'm sorry, what definition of family are you speaking of?
12:20 p.m.
Bloc
Meili Faille Bloc Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC
What is happening presently is that people, unfortunately, choose a bad route and go via the United States. People try to bring over their family, a cousin, an aunt or a brother, but they face difficulties in doing so.
Would you recommending widening the definition of family in order to allow bringing in more easily a family member such as a cousin?
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
The question is to broaden the definition of family so that a cousin or somebody else could come.
12:20 p.m.
Clinical Professor of Law, Immigration and Refugee Program, Harvard Law School
Do you mean under the safe third country agreement?
12:20 p.m.
Clinical Professor of Law, Immigration and Refugee Program, Harvard Law School
The exception now is a spouse, sons, daughters, parents, legal guardians, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, and nephews. That would certainly be a positive move, but I don't think the safe third country agreement is salvageable by any expansion of the exceptions. I think it's based on a fundamentally problematic assumption that has not been investigated in five years, which is whether the United States meets the requirements of being a safe country for refugees.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
12:20 p.m.
Co-Director, FCJ Refugee Centre, As an Individual
My concern is that the family definition that needs to be expanded in the agreement doesn't reflect the other definition of family that we have in other areas of law, because it is not possible to sponsor a niece or a nephew in a particular way, to bring that person to Canada. We have always been offering the idea of having a more flexible concept of family to include the de facto members of a family as well. We have discussions about how the concept we have in law of family is very limited in Canada and doesn't reflect the cultural realities for the refugee communities and immigrant communities.
12:20 p.m.
Bloc
Meili Faille Bloc Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC
I have another question. Here, in Canada, decisions have been made by the Committee against torture.
Did the Committee against torture establish any precedents in the United States in terms of cases? I know that here, in Canada, there was the case of Mr. Enrique Falcon Ríos, among others, which still has not been settled. There is another case in Toronto which is still outstanding. The situation of these people here, despite the fact that international organizations have commented—
12:20 p.m.
Bloc
Meili Faille Bloc Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC
I would simply like a snapshot of the situation in the United States in terms of torture. Are there any precedents? Did the Committee against torture express any blame?
12:25 p.m.
Clinical Professor of Law, Immigration and Refugee Program, Harvard Law School
The crux of the issue I see before this committee now has to do with the U.S. obligations under the refugee convention. Unfortunately, U.S. compliance with the convention against torture has not been what it should be, and it has certainly deteriorated in the last couple of years.