Evidence of meeting #48 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 board.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:35 p.m.
Former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Advisory Panel, As an Individual
But that's not what they did.
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
That may be, but then what was done was to exclude any appointment to the advisory panel whatsoever by the minister, or any say until the names came forward.
1:35 p.m.
Former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Advisory Panel, As an Individual
Yes, and I'm saying that's a good thing.
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Let's talk about that, because I think what's important is to make sure that every person who comes before the minister for an appointment meets some objective standard that qualifies the person to perform well in the job. Wouldn't you agree?
1:35 p.m.
Former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Advisory Panel, As an Individual
Yes.
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
And part of what this report suggests is that the objective standard for the written examination be set to make sure that people at least meet the minimal requirement. Wouldn't you agree?
1:40 p.m.
Former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Advisory Panel, As an Individual
I do. I think you're getting into a separate topic—
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
I am, but the point of the matter is that you want qualified people to go forward to the minister for potential appointment. What happened was that the people who went to the advisory board didn't have a passing mark, in terms of the qualifications. They needed a minimum of only 36 points to get referred to the advisory panel.
1:40 p.m.
Former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Advisory Panel, As an Individual
Yes, but what you're not stating is that there was never a requirement that people pass that test. It was one of the tools.
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
But I would say that this is the requirement suggested here, that there be an objective test and people pass the test before they even get to the advisory board. Wouldn't you agree with me?
1:40 p.m.
Former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Advisory Panel, As an Individual
I'm agreeing that was recommended.
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Yes, and what do you see wrong with an objective test that disqualifies those who can't even meet that basic requirement? Is that better?
1:40 p.m.
Former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Advisory Panel, As an Individual
What we had was an objective test that gave us a mark—
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
1:40 p.m.
Former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Advisory Panel, As an Individual
Let me finish, now. Although there were a small percentage of cases in the grey area of having failed by only a small amount, it was never in our mandate to exclude everybody who got a failing mark on the test. It was one of the considerations we had to look at.
I can tell you that in our considerations there were some extremely qualified people on their résumés who did not do well on the test. We felt that in fairness to the applicants, we had an obligation to look at whether or not the test adequately represented their qualifications. So in a small number of cases, after considerable consideration and debate, we decided that some people should get an interview.
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Let me say this. I'll stop you there, because the report particularly asks what the point of having a test is if you don't have a passing mark. Secondly, it states that of the people who didn't have a passing mark, even at the lower standard, I think 28% eventually were referred on to the minister for appointment.
1:40 p.m.
Former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Advisory Panel, As an Individual
I'm sorry, but 28% of people who failed were not passed along.
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Let me read it to you:
It is important to note that under present practice a large number of candidates (28% of the current batch of referrals to the Minister) who have failed to meet the agreed minimum competency—emerge as recommended candidates to the Minister.
That's what the report says.
1:40 p.m.
Former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Advisory Panel, As an Individual
Well, it's wrong.
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
It also says the following about the advisory panel and the selection board:
A further weakness of the...system is that, at present, few candidates are screened out after the AP
—the advisory panel, which you sat on—
referral is made to the SB: of 126 candidates referred by the AP to the SB, 114 attended the SB interview and 104 were recommended to the Minister (i.e. 88% make it through the SB phase).
It said that there's no point in having a selection board if everybody you recommend gets through.
Secondly, of the people who did make it through both panels, 28% didn't pass the basic minimum standards. So he's proposing a better system—
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
—an objective one with tests that are actually marked and then passed.
1:40 p.m.
Former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Advisory Panel, As an Individual
You've mixed together three or four different issues there. The fact of the matter is that, yes, some people who were recommended for interview did not pass the test. It was never in the mandate of our committee that they had to pass the test. You can put that in as a qualification, and frankly our committee would not have had a problem with that, but you can't change the rules midstream if you're going to be fair to people.
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Order, please.
I have one more questioner. It's quarter to two, and we have to be in the House by two o'clock, which means we have to leave here in seven minutes.
Mr. Telegdi.