Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 8th, 2008

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

That's a very good point. Thank you.

Ms. Grewal.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank all of you for coming here, and thank you so much for your presentations. We really appreciate that. At the end, if you could give a copy of your presentations to Mr. Chair, we would really like that.

The Government of Canada continually monitors the situation in Iraq, and Canada is also concerned for the estimated two million Iraqis who left Iraq for neighbouring countries, as well as 2.4 million others who are displaced within the country. So given the magnitude of the displacement and its impact on neighbouring countries, I do agree that it is important for other international countries to participate in resettlement efforts.

The Canadian International Development Agency is active in that area. I think all of you should be aware of that. They are providing both reconstruction and humanitarian assistance in that area and responding to the appeals of organizations such as the UNHCR.

Is CIDA doing enough there? That's what we would like to know.

[Nabil Farhan]

I could say on behalf of our community that the answer is zero. We've seen nothing.

What I'm saying is that they're doing construction, but we're now facing genocide. So the question is, what can CIDA could do to protect them? The question here is, how can we protect these people, and how can we bring them to safety?

So to answer your question, actually, unfortunately it's not helping here. I mean CIDA is trying to help in the construction, but it cannot help in the security situation and the refugee situation.

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

And which other countries are accepting these Iraqi refugees?

[Nabil Farhan]

In particular, Syria and Jordan are, because they're neighbouring countries. I think these two are.

I think it would be a good idea to give more money to the UNHCR to fund NGOs to help those refugees with schooling and health.

It's a deplorable situation. It's really miserable for refugees. I'm talking about Iraqis in general, but Mandaeans specifically, because they don't have an international organization that really gives them a hand at all. These people have basically sold whatever they had and are spending their savings. So it would be a good idea, for example, for the Canadian government to fund the UNHCR or other NGOs to help those refugees who are in Jordan and Syria currently.

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

Mr. Chair, I'll pass my time to Mr. Komarnicki.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

You have two and a half minutes.

Go ahead, Mr. Komarnicki, and then you can make a point as well, Ms. Benjamen.

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

Thank you.

I see, Alda, that you have a point you want to make, and I'll stop a little short to give you that time. And I appreciate what you said in terms of their need for infrastructure, food, and jobs. That's the main thing.

Obviously, as Paul Baba said, Canada is a shining example when you compare it to what the rest of the world is doing. We take about one-tenth of the refugees into the country, and we've increased the number of Iraqi refugees by more than 50% for 2008. But more can and perhaps needs to be done, and it's a question of how you do it.

I find interesting some of your comments that we use sponsorship because it's obviously cost-efficient. We certainly need to look at that area.

But one of the things you've said today that we haven't heard, or at least I haven't heard, in these hearings is about looking at the potential of resettling the many who are outside the country. When you compare what we're doing worldwide for refugees to the numbers of those who are displaced, it's really a drop in the bucket in simple terms. But to try to resettle the people and maybe use the resources to provide the infrastructure for that to happen--is the country in a position where realistically that could happen in the short term or the near future? That's my first question.

Perhaps, Alda, you can finish off with what you had in mind, and then I want to hear from Mirza, if I could.

And I realize that you get a balance.... We've put some $400 million to date into helping out in that area. You might be wanting to put that into Syria or Jordan, or actually into working in the resettlement area itself.

Go ahead.

[Alda Benjamen]

That's a very good question, sir. I will also make comments to address what Ms. Grewal asked.

CIDA hasn't really done anything to help the minorities of Iraq. On whether Canada can resettle, we can share reports with you that civil society organizations on the ground have broken down. The specific needs that will help our people stay in Iraq and others come back include projects for food, projects to build homes--a lot of things.

Thankfully, the Christians of Iraq, the ChaldoAssyrians, have many areas, but they are the indigenous people of the Nineveh Plains, where they have roots and monasteries dating back to the seventh century. So there is a huge connection. If Canada invests in areas like increased security...there is no police force there. If Canada invests in building infrastructure and building homes, things will change. It's a very fertile area. Farming is a huge investment for Canada, and it will change.

I can share reports with you. I didn't bring them because they weren't in French, but we can give you detailed reports on what civil society organizations in Iraq are saying.

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

I appreciate your passion on that.

I want to hear from Mr. Shmoil before we close. Thank you very much for your presentation.

[Mirza Shmoil]

In my opinion, any money spent by Canada or the United Nations would have better value if it were spent on resettlement, especially of the Christians in the north of Iraq. Then you wouldn't have to spend money in Syria and Jordan to keep the refugees in that situation.

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

Do you feel that's a possibility security-wise ?

[Mirza Shmoil]

Yes. If we are given self-rule in our homeland and money is spent for the resettlement of Assyrians and other religions into that area, that is very important.

It's never appreciated that Assyrians joined the allies in World War I and World War II and sacrificed thousands of people for democracy and the Allies. We always think that America, England, and to a lesser extent maybe Canada, owe the Assyrians a great deal and should help them in whatever way they can.

That's my opinion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

We'll give a final comment to Mr. Farhan before we wrap up.

[Nabil Farhan]

Thank you very much.

I want to emphasize that the option described by my colleague probably works for Assyrians, but it does not work for Mandaeans because Mandaeans don't have that option, those roots. So it's very critical that we look at this minority. It's facing genocide, and 80% have been uprooted from the country and cannot go back. Their homes have been destroyed.

So it's our duty to help them settle here. Also if we have money left, try to spend it on the NGOs that help Mandaeans in Syria and Jordan.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

I wish we could give you more time. An hour goes by very quickly. But we have other panels waiting to come on. Your presentations were very good, very interesting indeed, and we thank you for them. We'll be making recommendations to the government based on what we've heard you say.

We'll now take a short break.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

We're a little bit off schedule, but that's okay. We'll try to get our committee members back at the table again.

I want to welcome our second panel today. We have here, from STATUS Coalition, Amy Casipullai, who is the policy and public education coordinator for the Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants; and Francisco Rico-Martinez, a very familiar face here, who is co-director of Faithful Companions of Jesus Refugee Centre; from No One Is Illegal, Macdonald Scott, who is a certified immigration consultant with Carranza Barristers and Solicitors of Toronto; and Kirpa Kaur, an activist.

Welcome to all of you. You all know how the committee operates. I'm sure you have a seven-minute opening statement, and then we will go to committee members to interact and ask questions.

Will we go first to you, Amy? Thank you.

[Amy Casipullai, Policy and Public Education Coordinator, Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants, STATUS Coalition]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, I want to give you regrets from Avvy Go, a key leader in the STATUS campaign. She had fully intended to be here, but unfortunately, with the last-minute time change due to the committee's schedule, she couldn't be here. So we'll try to do the best we can in her absence.

I want to start by giving you a very brief background on how the campaign came about. We have had the opportunity to appear before a previous standing committee, but a number of the members of this committee are new.

The campaign first came together around 2000, so several years ago. Really, it was a move prompted by employers in construction, the carpenters' association and a number of unions involved with construction work, and a number of organizations working with immigrants and refugees, primarily in Toronto. Lawyers and people working in the legal field came together because almost all of these very different constituents noticed that there was a tremendous rise in the number of people without status, primarily in Toronto but also in cities such as Montreal and Vancouver. At that time, in 2000, we had identified this growing population as something that the government, we thought, needed to pay attention to and to look at what in our immigration policies actually contributed to creating this situation and what facilitated it.

In 2002, we had a change in legislation with the introduction of the IRPA, and we started noticing that the situation was exacerbated. In fact, with the new legislation, there was no process to deal with the existing non-status population in Canada, which has continued to grow, based on what we can see.

You must understand that given the nature of the population, it's very difficult to obtain accurate figures on the actual number of people, but at some point, I believe around 2003 or 2004, the Toronto Star reported that they estimated it was around 200,000 people across Canada. That was several years ago. We believe that number would have surely grown since then.

What we brought with us is the proposal for regularization of individuals and families without status that the campaign put together and launched in June 2006. We have reviewed it since then. Nothing has changed significantly for us to change our proposals in this document. We brought copies in English and French.

I'll just quickly go through it, because in a few minutes Francisco will go into some of the highlights of that proposal.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

So you'll be sharing your time with Mr. Rico-Martinez.

[Amy Casipullai]

That's right.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Okay, thank you.

[Amy Casipullai]

We'll also offer a number of other suggestions that relate to the topic under study.

The proposal essentially looks at the existing regulations, the existing legislation. What we suggest is that there are things the government can do right now without a legislative change. There are processes that exist in our current law. We also try to look at who exactly we mean when we talk about people without status and how they came to be in that situation. I don't want to go into it in too much detail, but it does deal with the situation of refugees, as well as the situation of people who are not refugees—sponsored family members or family members who came through other means, women who have been trafficked, seasonal agricultural workers, and live-in caregivers. All these people have, for the most part, entered Canada legally, one way or the other, through one or another of Canada's various programs, but due to circumstances and the complications of legislation and procedure, have become out of status. Almost all of them have, without a doubt, continued to work to support themselves in Canada, because they are often not eligible for programs and services.

So again, everything we propose in the document we believe can be accomplished without an extraordinary investment in resources by the government and can certainly be facilitated by community organizations that work with these populations.

I'll stop there and let Francisco continue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you very much.

Francisco.

[Francisco Rico-Martinez, Co-Director, Faithful Companions of Jesus (FCJ) Refugee Centre, STATUS Coalition]

Good morning. It's always a pleasure to be in front of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.

I will basically touch base on two issues that are going to affect the work we do with non-status people and temporary workers. The first one is about immigration consultants, the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants. We have a serious issue there, because this organization is a non-profit organization, and there is not a creator of status, so they don't have any power in court or anything. Basically, the decisions they make and the investigations they make are not enforceable.

The situation we have inside the CSIC is terrible. We just want to ask the committee to take a look seriously about the creation of a creator that is in the law and has the powers to regulate inside Canada, outside Canada, and people who are not only members of the association.

Most of the people we serve in our communities have been destroyed by immoral consultants, and we don't have any resources to deal with that. By the way, the RCMP, the police, CBSA, and Immigration Canada don't do anything to stop this situation. We report the cases directly to them, and they don't do anything because they believe that is not the priority.

The other situation you will have to deal with, if you deal with non-status people and temporary workers, is the situation of the immigration consultants overseas. This is the main issue for temporary workers: the people are agents who aren't scrutinized, and they have contacts with the embassies and everything, and they corrupt the system of immigration to Canada on a temporary basis or any other basis.

We make a very small point about the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants. We have been asking the government to take a look at the society, and it doesn't do anything because it's not a priority. Maybe the standing committee can really do something to scrutinize and do an audit of that society, even though it is non-profit and they go behind that; they protect themselves from that particular situation.

The other thing that is necessary to mention is that we want to ask the parliamentary standing committee on immigration issues to use its wisdom and maturity to do something about Bill C-50. We believe you did the right thing, calling meetings for consultations about every issue you take care of, because you want to have different perspectives. It is, in our opinion, very sad to see how the other changes are changing the whole shift of Immigration Canada and destroying the criteria in the law. It's going to be, may be legally passed, and the committee is not going to have anything to do. I don't know if the committee can call and ask to analyze this bill in their hands. You have the expertise in the area.

Let me finish by saying that we realize Bill C-50 is going to affect non-status people. It's about the backlog. The backlog is related to the people we have inside Canada. They are not dealing with humanitarian applications inside Canada; they are not dealing with any situations of non-status people applying for temporary work inside Canada. Basically what they are creating is this: the backlog is going to increase, because the issue will be that more temporary workers are going to apply to come to Canada. Now we have 500,000 applications for temporary workers. We're going to have maybe double that, and we don't have the resources to deal with that situation.

So please intervene and do whatever is necessary to stop this bill from happening.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you. That was nine or ten minutes.

Just to comment with regard to Bill C-50, the committee is going to be looking at that in due course. I think all members, Conservative, Bloc, Liberal, NDP, have agreed that we need to look at it. It is going to happen.

Mr. Scott.