Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 8th, 2008

[Macdonald Scott]

[Inaudible--Editor]

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Exactly. They wouldn't fit in the experienced class. There is really no hope for them to become landed immigrants. There is no hope for them to bring their family members to Canada. As a result, some of them are being told by some of the consultants, “Then why don't you apply for refugee status?” It then mucks up the refugee determination process.

The last I saw, at the Immigration and Refugee Board, partially because the Conservative government has not appointed a good number of panellists to it, the backlog is tremendous. It's probably going to grow in a year or two to 85,000. It's huge. So what's happening is that the entire system is being bogged down by temporary foreign workers who have no chance to stay. Perhaps, for some of them, their visa has expired. As a result, they apply for refugee status, it mucks up the status, and then some of them end up getting deported. It costs us $23 million to do that.

The entire system, to quote the minister, is crumbling. That is what she said on CBC Radio. Surely there's a better way to handle this whole mess.

[Macdonald Scott]

Here are a couple of things. I also think it ties in with what you're talking about concerning overseas consultants. I think if we have actual queues.... People talk about queue-jumping, but there is no queue for lower- and working-class people. If we have clear, simple programs without a set of forms like this that you have to fill in at every stage for lower- and working-class people, they're not going to go to these—if you'll excuse my legal term—scumbags, who then take their welfare cheques once they get here, if there's an actual process for them to come into Canada. Part of the reason people go to these, again, scumbags is that there is no process.

Then we hit it on the refugee side too. Canada keeps increasing interdiction overseas and we interdict more. We basically make it impossible for a refugee to get to Canadian soil in the first place.

So while I applaud Mr. St-Cyr—and we owe a debt of gratitude to your party for bringing that in—having an RAD doesn't make any difference if a refugee can't get to this soil to make a refugee claim in the first place.

Let's be honest, the overseas refugee program is a joke. It takes 5,000 a year. It asked Francisco's organization not to sponsor any more refugees two years ago because it couldn't process the ones it had. It's a joke.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

Mr. Komarnicki, you have seven minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have just a couple of points.

We took this committee, and it was to study undocumented workers, temporary foreign workers, and Iraqi refugees. We said we'll be studying Bill C-50 at another committee hearing, starting after we conclude this, and it'll also be looked at by finance.

I can say that after thirteen years of Liberal government, six ministers, four turns in office, many of them majorities, they've caused the immigration backlog to go from $50,000 to $800,000-plus, totally inept—

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

That's 800,000 people, not dollars.

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

Yes, 800,000 people, and they put the immigration system in the place where it is today, and it requires some action and reform.

I can tell you that the minister will not be interfering in individual cases, and the legislation is quite clear. She'll be issuing instructions with respect to broad government policy that will be set by the government of the day, and it'll be an opportunity for members of the opposition, including the Liberal Party, to stand up and be counted if they wish to oppose this legislation.

It will be non-discriminatory. It won't be based on ethnicity or any kind of discriminatory measure. It'll be debated in the House, it'll be debated in the committee, and there'll be opportunity for the minister to consult with provinces and stakeholders.

But that's for another day. That's not why we're here today, just to set the record straight. There will be debate on that.

We're here today to deal with the three issues I've outlined, and I'd like to remind everyone that the United Nations High Commissioner said Canada's refugee protection system was a model for the rest of the world. There's always room for improvement, and we should do better, but that's what he said. Proportionately, Canada takes more refugees per capita than any other country in the world, about one tenth of all of the refugees. We heard today how we can do better and how we might do better.

But I'll ask Amy about some specific questions for what we're looking at today. For those to whom we refer sometimes as undocumented, people who are here, would it be fair to say that they would comprise groups such as failed refugee claimants, or people who came here on a temporary resident visa or came from countries that didn't require visas and essentially found themselves out of status and decided not to go through any other process, but stay here for the moment? Would that be the majority of the people we're talking about, Amy?

[Amy Casipullai]

Thank you for the question.

I think we are looking at a number of reasons why people become out of status—

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

But just on the question I asked specifically, the group of people we're talking about as undocumented, would they primarily be composed of the people I outlined?

[Amy Casipullai]

I think that's part of it, but not the full story certainly, because it implies that people arrive in Canada and some intend to stay here without status. There are actually no processes right now in Canada even if someone—let's say who arrived on a temporary work permit and became out of status—wanted to stay legally. They have little or no legal recourse right now.

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

But that's not my question. My question was concerning the group we're talking about. Primarily, they came here legitimately in one fashion or another; is that the premise?

[Amy Casipullai]

That's right.

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

The majority of them would have come here either on a temporary resident visa or from a country that didn't require a visa, or they had a refugee claim that hasn't been successful and they find themselves in that situation.

[Amy Casipullai]

That's right.

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

And if they fail a refugee claim, for instance, they would be entitled to apply for leave to the Federal Court itself, if they wish to overturn that.

[Amy Casipullai]

However, that's a very limited option. It assumes that individual has the resources to pursue that.

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

Right, but it is an option?

[Amy Casipullai]

It's a limited option, if you want to put it that way.

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

Okay. Then they would have the opportunity to apply under humanitarian and compassionate grounds if that didn't work out. If they wanted to stay in Canada, they could try that avenue as well, could they not?

[Amy Casipullai]

Again, that's a limited option. I think my colleagues have expertise in this.

But I do want to point out that just because--

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

But my question is whether that option is available.

[Amy Casipullai]

It's not a real option. Even if someone applies for an H and C--and the process itself is fairly complicated--it doesn't limit that person from being removed from Canada. They can be deported.

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

Before they're deported, there would be a pre-removal risk assessment. Would you agree with that?

[Francisco Rico-Martinez]

The rate of acceptance is 1%.

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

The point is that there are a number of processes they could go through. If the decision is made that they must return, you're saying that's not acceptable and we need to open up another avenue to allow them to stay.