Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 7th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Yes, you do, Mr. Alghabra.

Go ahead. You've got a couple of minutes yet.

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

I really don't have any more questions. I just want to leave with you the fact, and I will probably be reiterating something that you agree with and believe in, that those are extremely awesome responsibilities you have. You are making life-and-death decisions at times. You're right, the difficulty here is in balancing between fairness and efficiency and protecting the interests of Canada, as well as protecting vulnerable individuals who need our help.

Thank you for your service. I want to urge you to remain cognizant of these priorities, and I wish you all success.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you, Mr. Alghabra.

We now go to Madame Faille.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome you. I'd like to thank you for having agreed to appear before the committee. It has become a habit, in fact, since we began our study of the board, problems related to the backlog and problems that refugees are experiencing. That is why we decided to ask future members to appear before the committee so that we can ask you some questions. This also gives us an opportunity to see you and to learn why you want to do this job.

With regard to the duties you are required to perform, are you able to work in French? What level of understanding of this language do you have? Among the complaints that we heard, some concerned the workplace. The members are not always able to work in their language on a daily basis. I'd like to know your language level, with respect to the duties you have. I believe that this is important because the people whose cases you hear, as my colleague mentioned earlier, come from various regions throughout the world, including some where people also speak French. Other complaints we heard in offices in western Canada and in Toronto concerned the difficulty of being served in French, which is one of the two official languages.

I would also like to know whether, since your appointment, you have had the opportunity to meet with partners, such as immigration consultants or the Canadian Bar Association, to talk about the future of the Immigration and Refugee Board, or IRB. There are many problems. It takes far too long for cases to be heard.

I believe that earlier my colleague was trying to understand your priorities as a manager. So, the difficulty of scheduling meetings is causing a lot of problems for the partners, and agencies working with refugees. Many of them do not have a lot of funding. Yet, it takes about 30 to 40 hours to prepare a refugee application. People at legal aid also have very little time to prepare a case.

What do you think about this, with regard to the partners concerned? I can appreciate that you want to be efficient and hear cases within a six-month period. In fact, that has always been the board's intention. No one likes to have a backlog, because the longer people wait, the more settled they get, the more attached they are to Canada. So you will understand that we are aware of all these issues. But how do you, as a manager, see this? Please tell us too what you want to achieve and why you wanted to become a member.

Thank you.

[Ken Sandhu]

Mr. Chairman, I'll start off by answering that I am learning French. My office is fully bilingual. All instructions or directions that have to be issued are issued in both languages. I have every desire and plan to learn French.

With respect to meeting with the partners or stakeholders, before I answer that, let me say that in the short time I have been in the position, even though I've been finishing off my work in Toronto, I have managed to meet with all the members in all three offices. Toronto, of course, I knew well, having been there for three years. I've been to Montreal, and I'm going back again; we're having a quality training session next week.

With respect to stakeholders and partners, we have had meetings with them. We have just concluded a one-day session at the national level with all of those groups that you mentioned. And we have put back on track the regional consultations, which I think are in some ways more important than the national one, because that's where the work gets done. That's where those issues that need to be resolved must be resolved. I know that my colleague held a meeting in Toronto just a week ago. There is one taking place in Montreal next week. And we will be looking at holding one in Vancouver.

As you say, they are our partners, and they bring forward issues that are crucial to the proper functioning of this organization.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Perhaps you could give us an update after your meeting to tell the committee of these individuals' concerns? Perhaps in the next few weeks, you could advise the committee of your concerns. We have not always had the opportunity to meet with them individually. However, when such meetings do happen, there is an opportunity to get into the technical details or details regarding the problems. So I would like you to give the committee an update regarding their concerns.

[Krista Daley, Senior General Counsel, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada]

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. Perhaps you could clarify. Do you mean that we would come back and report to this committee on an ongoing basis about our various stakeholder consultations?

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

The meeting will be held next week. As you know, we will soon recess. However, over the summer, the committee members will do work on their own. So, we won't necessarily have the opportunity to meet with each of the partners this summer. I would ask you to provide us with the list of people who take part and a summary of the meeting, so we can learn what their main concerns are, and so that in the fall when we come back to talk about issues affecting refugees, we will have a briefing book.

Thank you.

[Krista Daley]

Yes, we're prepared to do that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you, Madame Faille.

Mr. Siksay.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Again, I want to thank you for celebrating your 32nd anniversary with us, Mr. Sandhu. I hope you have a more appropriate celebration later on today.

And I hope you didn't miss out on your daughter's birthday celebration last night, Ms. Figg.

I also want to thank you for the important work you do in the protection of refugees. It is something that is very important to Canadians, as I'm sure you both know. Canada, I think, is justly proud of our recent record in the protection and resettlement of refugees. I know that your part in operating a fair and just system is crucial to both that hope of Canadians and the reputation Canada has. So thank you very much for that work.

Mr. Sandhu, my first question--and it may be a very simple thing--is when your appointment as the deputy chairperson of the refugee protection division was announced, it said that you were designated. It didn't use the word “appointment”. I'm wondering if someone, maybe Ms. Daley, could explain the difference between designation and appointment. When you spoke, you used the word “appointment”, but I think the press releases and the other issues talked about designation.

I'm just trying to understand the difference.

[Krista Daley]

It's a good thing I brought my well-worn legislation here. Let me have a look.

I will read from the legislation itself:

The Chairperson and the Deputy Chairpersons and Assistant Deputy Chairpersons...are appointed on a full-time basis and the other members are appointed....

The word “designation” has come up in the context of the IRB, with respect to the coordinating members, who are, in essence, the people who would report to Lois Figg, and they are designated by the chairperson to be coordinating members. There is sometimes some confusion around that, but by legislation, the chairperson, the deputy chair, and the assistant deputy chair were appointed by the GIC, so these two members were appointed by the GIC.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Why was the language of designation used in terms of Mr. Sandhu's becoming the deputy chairperson?

[Krista Daley]

Is that in the press release?

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Yes, and it is in his CV as well from the IRB website. It says that Mr. Sandhu was appointed a member of the Immigration and Refugee Board on June 21, 2004, and designated deputy chairperson of the refugee protection division on March 5, 2007.

[Krista Daley]

I really can't comment on that. That might be just a form issue. I really can't comment on why that is. By legislation, it is an appointment, and it's a Governor in Council appointment.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

I wonder if both of you might describe the process you went through in terms of re-appointment and appointment to the deputy chairperson jobs you have? Just describe what the process involved from the time you expressed interest in those positions.

[Ken Sandhu]

I'll go first.

Mr. Chairman, I was appointed to the Immigration and Refugee Board in June 2004. I applied for the position in January 2002. It went through a series of checks, I would say. My application was first vetted against criteria, I understand, and I was informed that it would now go forward. I had to then appear for a fairly extensive written test. After the test, I had to provide references, and I know that my references were checked quite extensively. After that, there was a three-person committee that interviewed me. After that, I was informed that I had been successful and that my name was on this list.

Then in early 2004 I was informed that there was one more step as a result of a new process that had been constructed, and I would have to appear for one more interview. At that time, I was interviewed by the former chairperson, Mr. Jean-Guy Fleury, as well as the assistant deputy chairperson in Toronto and one other community person. As a result of that interview, my name was put forward to the minister, and I was informed that I was appointed in 2004.

With respect to the deputy chair position, the deputy chair position was advertised on our website in the fall of 2006. I applied. I was called for an interview in December 2006. I was interviewed by a representative of the Prime Minister's Office, of the Privy Council Office, and the then minister's office, and the former chairperson was also present, although he didn't actively ask any questions.

As a result of that interview, I was informed that three names had been put forward and that I was one of those three. Eventually I got the word saying I was the one who had been picked.

[Lois D. Figg]

As I mentioned, I first became assistant deputy chairperson of the immigration appeal division, and that was in the spring of 2005. I had simply responded to a call for expressions of interest. I'm trying to think back, but I believe we were required to answer three questions. I don't remember what they were, but basically it was outlining your vision of what you would do in your division were you to become the assistant deputy chair. I was shortlisted for an interview. I was interviewed—I think it was around December 2004—by Mr. Fleury, our former chair; by Marcie Bourassa, who was at the time the deputy chairperson; and by somebody from our human resources department. I know the chair had my performance evaluations before him. From then, I'm not sure how many names might have been recommended to the minister. But I was eventually appointed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

It's eight minutes now.

[Krista Daley]

Mr. Chair, I think I need to clarify my answer to Mr. Siksay with respect to the legislation, because of course I've been sitting here now combing through my legislation, trying to find a response.

If I could just clarify the record, I did err, Mr. Siksay. There is a provision that says that the deputy chair and the ADCs are in fact designated by the Governor in Council from among the full-time members, and then the chair, deputy chair, and assistant deputy chairs are appointed on a full-time basis. So it is in fact a designation. I erred, and if the record wants to be clear, that's subsection 153(2).

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

Ms. Grewal, you have seven minutes.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to you all for your time and your presentations.

I have two questions. They're very short, and they go to Ms. Figg.

Ms. Figg, according to a story in The Globe and Mail in 2004, you accepted about 289 refugee claimants out of 353. That's an 81% acceptance rate. This gave you the highest acceptance rate in the country. The national average was I think between 42% to 47%. This, I believe, was for the 2001 to 2003 period. Why were you more likely to rule in favour of a claimant than your colleagues? I just want to know.

My second question is.... I would like to say that your qualifications are impeccable.

[Lois D. Figg]

Thank you very much.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

You have a master of law degree and experience as a human rights officer with the Ontario Human Rights Commission and as an appeal counsellor at the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. And of course you have seven years of experience on the IRB.

Would you please tell us something about your experience as a woman hearing applications for asylum? Do you feel that your sex provides you with advantages or disadvantages in the performance of your job?