Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 17th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

On behalf of our committee, let me welcome you, gentlemen, to our committee hearing.

I will pass the meeting over to you, Mr. Faull, and you can introduce your people.

[Jonathan Faull, Director-General, European Commission for Freedom, Justice and Security]

I will indeed, Chair, thank you very much.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It's a great pleasure to be here. Perhaps a word of explanation of who I am, what I do, and why I'm here would be helpful.

I am director general of the European Commission's Directorate-General for Justice, Freedom and Security. Those obviously are very fine aspirations, and we try every day to bring them to life in the 25 member states of the European Union. What we do essentially covers what in our member states are dealt with by ministries of justice and ministries of the interior; I'm not quite sure what the equivalent would be here. This ranges from immigration, asylum, and border issues to the fight against organized crime, the fight against terrorism, the protection and promotion of fundamental rights, civil law, family law questions, and criminal law questions more generally.

The European Union, as you all know, is made up of 25 countries, very soon to be 27, and who knows how many more after that in the immediate or medium term.

We have some direct responsibilities under common policies and under the common legal system of the European Union. Most relevant, I think, for my visit to Canada is the set of issues around borders, visas, asylum, the way in which we manage access to our territory, and the rights of our citizens to travel within our borders and internationally.

With me today is Eric Hayes, our ambassador, the head of the European Union's delegation to Canada; Chris Kendall, who works in our delegation in Ottawa, which is a few metres down the road; and Joannes de Ceuster, who is the head of the borders and visas unit in my directorate-general in Brussels.

I have to say that our relations with Canada are extremely well established, very friendly and very cooperative. There is very little we disagree on. However, the main purpose of my visit here is to discuss an area of some concern in the relations between the European Union and Canada. This concerns the visa regime that we apply to you and you apply to us.

I think the custom in this great Parliament is to use both of the national languages of Canada. We do this sort of thing in Brussels as well, so if you will permit me, I'll say a few words in French.

The problem with visas stems from the fact that we have two different legal systems: the Canadian system on the one hand, and the European system on the other. The Canadian system is one that you are familiar with. The European system is based on the notion of the European community. Our members States form one single union and we have a common policy on visas. On the international level, the policy is based on reciprocity, in the sense that our law requires us to demand visas from citizens of countries that require the same from our citizens, and to not demand visas from countries that do not.

As you know, reciprocity cannot be attained overnight. For some time, we have been working with asymmetrical situations, wherein certain countries require visas from some of our countries, even though we do not retaliate by demanding mandatory visas from citizens of those countries.

For some time, the European Union has been expanding. Today, we have 25 states, tomorrow, we will perhaps have 27. The largest expansion took place in 2004, with the membership of 10 new countries. These were mostly countries from Eastern Europe, or Central Europe, but also included two Mediterranean islands, Malta and Cyprus.

These countries, by joining the European Union, adopt what we call our corpus, a somewhat fancy word. What is our corpus? It is our legislation. It is everything we have done since the European Union was created in the early 1950s. The countries integrate the whole of European laws, obligations, duties, and rights into their national legislation. By doing so, they also embrace the principle of reciprocity, and these countries' citizens expect Europe to grant them access without a visa to countries for which we allow access to European Union countries without a visa.

As I was saying, it is a process. Reciprocity does not occur overnight. Therefore, for some time, we have been holding discussions with a few countries, including Canada, with a view to attaining reciprocity in the foreseeable future.

We have similar but not identical problems with the United States, Brazil, certain Latin American countries and other countries throughout the world.

In January, we issued a European Commission report to our Parliament and to our council of ministers, to track the progress, or lack thereof, in different countries with which we have not concluded reciprocity agreements. That report announced another report to be published six months later, which takes us to about now. When we go back to Europe this weekend, we will be putting the finishing touches on the report, which will be published in early July.

And so I came here—I was also in Washington—to meet with our partners and talk about what has been done, what can be done with respect to access to the countries concerned, without the requirement of a visa. I will remind you that Canadians have access to all European countries without a visa. You simply arrive at our borders and present your passport.

As you know, that is not the case here. Some of our countries, for example, mine and Joannes de Ceuster's... Yes, we happen to be citizens of Belgium and the United Kingdom, but citizens from some of our new partners, 7 out of 25 countries, are still required to present a visa upon entering Canada. These countries are essentially Central and Eastern European countries, or Baltic republics.

These countries have re-established democracy after many years of dictatorship and occupation, have joined NATO, the European Union, and to be very clear with you, do not quite understand why they are not being treated the same way as their fellow European citizens from the longer-standing Union member countries.

We tell them to be patient. We tell them that reciprocity cannot be obtained overnight. It is a process. Certain criteria must be met. We say that like them, we are in the midst of bilateral discussions with you, the Canadian authorities, with a view to obtaining equal reciprocal treatment.

For them, the criteria are not always clear or transparent. Nonetheless, we have all understood that it is important for these countries to convince you, your government, and your authorities that they respect all laws, criteria, and necessary standards to allow them to dispense with visas.

You must understand that the obligation is particularly onerous in countries where there is no Canadian consulate, no Canadian embassy to issue a visa. For example, in Estonia... I know that you do not have the resources to set up a very vast network of consulates, of embassies throughout the world. Estonians must travel to Warsaw. Estonia is not very close to Warsaw. It complicates the lives of people who believe themselves to be full-fledged citizens of the world, of the European Union, of NATO, and what we used to and still refer to as the Western world.

Therefore, I came here to speak honestly about these issues with your authorities. We must produce a report upon our return to Brussels. Under the legislation that mandates our report, we must state what measures must be taken to establish or re-establish reciprocity if progress has not been made. In all honesty, if I'm unable to leave Canada after tomorrow night without the ability to write in our report that there is indeed a possibility, a hope, progress, then we will most likely have to consider other measures. We will be put under considerable pressure from the concerned member states, as well as other countries that stand in solidarity with their partners, to do something reciprocal for everyone.

It is therefore not impossible... This is not a threat. I did not come here... I'm not a pessimist, that is not my style, I do not threaten anyone. I strongly hope to leave after tomorrow with something useful in my pocket, in my head, and if that is not the case, we will have to consider other measures, and among those measures, we may have to consider requiring a visa from certain categories of Canadian passport holders, such as diplomatic or duty passport holders. That is not certain but the possibility is there.

I will go back to my mother tongue, having tortured you with my French.

I didn't torture you? Thank you.

This is the situation. We hope to leave here with some good news. This is a process. We don't expect overnight results. But we are now two years into the new Europe, with 25 members. Our rules are based on reciprocity. Yours are not. I understand that. Our rules are based on a collective vision of the European Union as 25 countries, but with a common European citizenship that grants certain rights and carries with it certain obligations. Yours aren't. You look at each of our countries individually.

We have very good EU-Canada relations, thanks in part to our excellent ambassador here and thanks to the efforts of many of you and to your people in Brussels as well. So you understand the European Union. You know what we are; you know what we're not.

But one of the things we are is a group of countries with a set of common rules and polices and hopes, and to a certain extent a common citizenship. One of the features of the common citizenship is that we have a common visa regime with foreign countries, which should ultimately, soon we hope, be based on relations of reciprocity. It's not everywhere. It's getting better in most places. It hasn't gotten much better in Canada up to now. I'm here in the hope that it soon will.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

Will you be meeting with the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, or do you want your views communicated to the minister through our committee?

[Jonathan Faull]

I should be delighted if you were able to communicate my views. I shall be meeting.... Eric?

[Eric Hayes, Ambassador, European Commission for Freedom, Justice and Security]

You're meeting the whole team from Citizenship and Immigration tomorrow. We basically have a whole half-day of talks with Citizenship and Immigration at the senior official level.

[Jonathan Faull]

They will listen to me, but they perhaps may listen more to you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

I guess you would want to entertain some comments and questions now.

[Jonathan Faull]

I would be delighted to.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

I will go to you, Andrew, Ed, Borys, and Madame Faille.

[Andrew Telegdi, Liberal, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Actually, here's a bit of perspective on it, in terms of Canada's position. Back when the Iron Curtain fell and Canada gave new visa requirements to the new countries that were now beyond the Iron Curtain--I know because I was parliamentary secretary at the time--we started getting a lot of refugee applications, in particular from the Roma, but from others as well. I think what really has changed significantly, and I think it's important for us all to understand it, is that now these countries, first of all, are members of OSCE. Secondly, they're members of NATO. And then they are members of the European Union. As far as protections from human rights abuses go, I dare say they're probably better than Canada's, because you have these various bodies looking at it.

Having said that, I know from immigration officials where the problem comes from; it comes from people from Europe being able to apply for refugee status. That's our problem, for creating that kind of situation. Somehow we feel that our system is superior to the European Union's, but I say that you have many more checks and balances in Europe.

I know it's not a threat, and I know how these things work, but if we continue our present posture, then eventually Canadians will have to get visas when they go to Europe. That's just the nature of the beast. If you can deal with it, deal with the fact that we don't have to listen or take refugee applications from Europe. I think that would be a way to solve the problem as far as the officials are concerned. Having followed their mindset over a number of years, that's where they're at.

I don't know if you want to comment on that. I know we have a private member's bill before the House from Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, Motion No.19, which actually deals with that. But I think that probably captures the problem you have been having with officials on this. I'm very sympathetic. I very much want to see the department drop the visa requirement, because I don't think Canadians will relish the thought of going to Europe and having to go through the visa process hassle themselves.

[Jonathan Faull]

Thank you, Chair.

I'll make just a brief comment on that.

That is not what we want either, of course, and I hope very much that we don't have to go down that road. I'm aware, of course, of the history of the arrival, some years ago now, of Roma citizens of some of the countries that are now member states of the European Union and of their applications for asylum.

I would say a number of things. First of all, Europe has changed. These countries have changed. There is a new reality in Europe. I wouldn't presume to comment on the Canadian system for protection of fundamental rights, but from what I can see from afar, it looks pretty good. But we have, as you rightly say, a considerable network of systems of protection of fundamental rights in each country in the European Union, in the other organizations to which you referred.

All of our member states are parties to the European Convention on Human Rights, to the system of adjudication in Strasbourg to which that gives rise, and to the European Union's own legal system, which contains a whole series of protections as well.

Those are the facts. I think some of the concerns that were expressed some years ago would no longer make a lot of sense today. So these are clearly issues that I very much hope the Canadian authorities will take to heart.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

Ed, please, then Borys.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you very much for your frank and direct comments as to the issues that concern you. Certainly, we'll see to it that the issues you've raised get back to the minister directly, because they are significant; they are important.

I'm happy to hear that reciprocity doesn't happen overnight. There is some due diligence that needs to be done and some correspondence back and forth, which I understand is happening.

One of the thoughts I had is that of course many of the issues that involve visas between EU members may not have the same difficulties or implications that may be experienced by Canada, given the dynamics of various issues, perhaps the one raised by Mr. Telegdi.

As I understand it now, there is no process, when you decide which country is on or off, for involving a country like Canada--with any of the particular or peculiar issues it may have--in that decision-making process. That's one thought that came to my mind, that there's no mechanism in place to look at some issues that may be legitimate to one country but might not be of concern to other members.

The second part of it is there was no simultaneous process for another country to be looking at visa exemptions while you're looking at the particular country coming into the EU or not. I suppose you could say there are some benchmarks or certain conditions that need to be met.

Maybe there is a process that could be beneficial to both, if one were to use it side by side as you're going through that, as opposed to.... Essentially, what you're saying is if we've decided, with issues relevant to the EU, to admit the country and not require a visa, then automatically that should apply across. But some of the concerns we may have here may not be the same concerns you have there when you're making that decision. Maybe there's some room for looking at those kinds of issues.

Are there any comments on that?

[Jonathan Faull]

Certainly. Thank you.

Well, there is no formal mechanism for Canadian participation, but there are loads of informal contacts, and this is one of them, in a way. Our delegation here has a whole range of discussions with the Canadian authorities on these issues, as do the countries concerned bilaterally. I am in constant contact with your ambassador in Brussels on these issues and we have been for many years.

It's not an overnight phenomenon, that you join the European Union and the following day you get reciprocity from the rest of the world. That's not the world we live in. We know that. Getting from A to B, or from A to Z, from where we are to the final destination, requires discussion and contacts and taking into account your concerns and our concerns. It is a process.

There are, on our side, various benchmarks, which can be helpful, I think, in your assessment of our situation. First of all, before a country joins the European Union, it goes through years of often agonizing legislation, decisions, assessment, peer reviews, reports, tests, and by the time the country joins the European Union you can be absolutely sure that it is a fully fledged democracy operating under the rule of law, market economy, and it meets the high standards of protection of fundamental rights. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a member of the European Union. It's as simple as that. Also, you can be sure it has a properly functioning administration capable of administering the rules that the European Union brings to it, which are not simple, and are sometimes excessively complicated. So that is true.

The second thing, of immediate relevance to this issue, is it has to have document security and produce passports in accordance with agreed European rules on biometric identifiers, which are, I think, in the vanguard of all that you and we and others are doing to make sure that our documents are 100% safe, using the best of modern technologies so that they can't be falsified, and you really are who you say you are. It's not just a question of a signature and a photograph, but we're going to use fingerprints and digital photographs. Some of our passports have them in already, and by the summer they all will. We'll do this not only to meet what our friends down the road from here in Washington want us to do; I always say that we would do this anyway, even if the United States didn't oblige us to. If the United States didn't exist, I often say, and if King George were still sitting on his throne in Washington, we would still be doing it. Why? Because it's the best application of modern technology to the identity documents that we need.

Most of us, until recently, had the same sorts of passports as our parents and grandparents had. You had a photograph and a signature. Well, that's not very foolproof, and we know that. In the dangerous world in which we live, we couldn't put up with that any more.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Will the U.S. be exempt from visa requirements of the EU countries?

[Jonathan Faull]

We have a very similar problem with them, as we do with you. We allow Americans in without visas--all of us. They do not allow all of us in without visas. Your list of our member states where visas are required is the three Baltic republics, so Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, and Poland. They have that list, to which they have added Greece--not even a new member state, as Greece has been a member state for a long time--Malta, and Cypress, for reasons that are not altogether clear.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Borys, please.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Do the passport security regimes by these new EU entrants now match the passport regimes in the other EU countries, the most recent entrants?

[Jonathan Faull]

Yes, they do. In fact, they are ahead of some of the existing countries, but by this summer all of our countries will have all new passports issued with biometric identifiers.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

What timelines are we potentially looking at if there's no progress in our discussions between the EU and the Canadian government?

[Jonathan Faull]

On the first timeline, Monday morning we will sit down in our offices, once we're over our jet lag, and start writing this report. This report will be issued in the first couple of weeks of July. It will go through, country by country, where we do not have full reciprocity. So it will say: we had a problem with Brazil and it is being sorted out in the following way; we had a problem with Australia and it is being sorted out; we had a problem with Brunei--believe it or not--and it is being sorted out in a certain way; we have a problem with the United States and it is or is not being sorted out in a certain way; we have a problem with Canada and it is or is not being sorted out in a certain way.

That report will, if it remains necessary, be accompanied by either the announcement of or perhaps even a legislative proposal already providing for measures to be taken against the countries that have not shown us progress toward reciprocity.

The European Commission doesn't legislate; it proposes legislation. The legislation will ultimately be adopted by the council of ministers representing the ministers of our member states, and it will be adopted on a qualified majority vote by those ministers.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

What is the shortest timeline in which we may face a visa regime for travelling to Europe?

[Jonathan Faull]

That depends on how long the legislation takes to be enacted and what date of entry into force we put on it. It won't be for a few months. It probably won't cover this summer, for example, when no doubt a lot of Canadians travel to Europe. I don't think the legislation will have gone through the council decision-making process by then. But it might well be ready and in force by the end of the year.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

As a point of information, as referenced a little earlier by Mr. Telegdi, I have a private member's motion that was tabled in our House of Commons on April 4 under M-19--I'm just waiting for translations to arrive so I can distribute it--that deals with this specific issue.

If you know the peculiarities of our system here, on private members' bills and motions there is a lottery that takes place. Unfortunately, I don't typically buy lottery tickets, and this lottery established why I don't. I came up as number 230. So by the time this is dealt with...who knows whether this government will even survive that sort of timeline. But for your reference, I would like to distribute this by the time this meeting is done.

I've had numerous conversations with the department on this particular issue, and I have as yet not heard any good reasons, other than risk aversion and almost an Iron Curtain mentality.... Although the Iron Curtain fell a number of years ago, in their minds it seems to still exist, or they'd like to pretend it still exists. That's quite problematic, because the world has changed significantly since that time. But at least you can be assured that a number of parties in our House of Commons are very supportive of this position and would like to see this expedited.

It's unfortunate that the only reason it might be expedited and the government might move on this.... We don't have to wait for this motion. The government has the capacity to move on this expeditiously within the timelines you have spoken about.

So if you aren't very encouraged with your discussions in the ministry, at least be encouraged that there is quite a bit of support for this position in the House of Commons, as well as with the Canadian public.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Madam Faille.