Evidence of meeting #16 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was hearing.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Chairman, Niagara Region
Yes, it is, but I would suggest that to the extent that we've done it, because we're a border city.... I think the crossing at Fort Erie is the busiest in Canada, and I think we have reached out to the province and the federal government in the past for assistance--
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
The Region of Niagara Falls spending $1 million I think is well worth it, to welcome people who are fleeing from situations that are stressful to their lives.
Chairman, Niagara Region
Oh, definitely. I'm not talking about the cost; I'm only letting you know what it is. I was not complaining about the cost or suggesting--
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Mr. Partington, let me repeat the question, and to you, Mr. Salci.
Do you think you're spending the money wisely to welcome people who are coming to Canada seeking a better life and they're fleeing a situation, or do you regret having to put your taxpayers through that expense?
Chairman, Niagara Region
I said it before and I'll say it again, there is no regret. We're pleased to do it and we do it. We live up to our responsibilities.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
We're going to have to stop. If you want to have the mayor answer, that's it, Mr. Karygiannis.
Mayor, City of Niagara Falls
Mr. Karygiannis, I should explain that we have a two-tier government here. Actually, we have 12 municipalities in the Region of Niagara. The regional chair is the chairman of the region, and the region is responsible for social welfare. As the City of Niagara Falls, we contribute about 23% of the total operating costs to the region. That's based on our population.
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Thank you very much.
You told us that you support overall the bill that is before us. Are you in agreement with the minister who wants to set the timeframe for the initial interview at eight days and that for the hearing at 60 days?
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
That is the theory but, in practice, what do we do in the case of an individual who presents himself for the interview within the eight days, as requested, but is unable to properly recount his story? Is the person's request simply rejected? Is the meeting put off to a later date? What would you suggest be done?
Mayor, City of Niagara Falls
Well, the primary interview, of course, at eight days sets a purpose. It allows the government to collect the initial information and to open the file. We understand it's only an interview, it's a tentative interview, and many times the claimants won't have any representation at that stage. We believe there will be plenty of time within the 60-day period to have their case heard thereafter. So I think it would expedite the matters.
We see many delays, and if you reflect on more efficiencies.... If I could offer my opinion, if we could deal with these matters on a more timely basis, we could save everyone a lot of extra dollars. The regional chairman was relating to that earlier in that cost amount we talked about. We don't begrudge this amount being spent, but we'd like to see it be done in a very efficient manner.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
You are saying that it is just a primary interview and that the person will have 60 days to prepare him or herself for the hearing. It remains that this interview must have some purpose. You cannot simply ask people to provide their name, their date of birth and their country of origin. We will ask them for explanations and to tell their story. If they are unable to do so, are you suggesting that we wait 60 days, until the hearing, for them to do so? Have I understood you correctly?
Mayor, City of Niagara Falls
No, I don't. I think it would give the government opportunity to gain initial information on the file and open their file. So it starts the process, and I think that's certainly important. It would happen sooner and allow the government to begin the information gathering they have to have for the hearing.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
If, 60 days later, during the course of the hearing, the lawyer demonstrates that he was unable to obtain the necessary documents so as to establish the proper evidence and if the commissioner does indeed believe that the person made a legitimate attempt to obtain the documents and will do so eventually, in your view, what should the commissioner do in this case?
Mayor, City of Niagara Falls
I believe, obviously, every case will be treated individually, but the board chair or the hearing chair would have to deal with that request presented to him or her, and, I guess depending upon the extenuating circumstances, would have to grant the time allowed or necessary to give that individual a fair hearing.
Chairman, Niagara Region
I would think, as well, that 60 days is a significant length of time to prepare, particularly where you have lawyers who specialize in these matters. Certainly the hearing officers will have to distinguish if there are significantly extenuating circumstances. Maybe there's a provision for some extension relief. But generally speaking, I think the 60-day time period certainly should be a reasonable time for lawyers to prepare a case.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Most of the lawyers and their representatives who have appeared before us have said that it is too short a timeframe. A simple back and forth exchange through the mail can take up to a month in the case of certain African countries. You are talking about two weeks in one direction and two weeks in the other. By trying to move things forward too quickly, we might risk finding ourselves in a situation where the hearing does indeed take place within the required 60 days but, in the end, in one out of every two cases, the hearing has to be adjourned and postponed until later because of the simple fact that the lawyers were not allowed enough time to prepare themselves. Are you not afraid that this might simply lead to situations that are the opposite of what had been aimed for?
Mayor, City of Niagara Falls
Once again, I want to reiterate that I believe the process being speeded up would certainly create more efficiency. I don't think we'd ever intend to limit a claimant's legal rights. We would certainly hope that the hearing chair would allow for sufficient time for information to be gathered and conveyed. We have modern technology, which is instant in terms of e-mail and access by computers, so obviously, if there were data that had not been accumulated, we wouldn't be relying on mail to mail these documents back and forth; we would have technology available to us. So I believe--
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Mr. Salci, the fact that we have the technology here does not mean that the individual's country of origin necessarily has the required technology to produce the documents. Generally speaking, the person will have fled without leaving a trail behind. We are presuming that the person is a refugee. These people cannot simply send an e-mail back home in the belief that someone will forward them the information requested. All of the lawyers are telling us that this can take up to 60 days.
I am not opposed to speeding up the process, but virtually all of the lawyers that we have heard here have told us that this objective could be difficult to reach. Could we have greater flexibility on the enforcement side of things? We could allow a few doors to remain open and provide that, if 60 days are sufficient, all the better, but if that timeframe does not suffice, we are not going to call a hearing in the morning to, in the end, adjourn after 15 minutes and resume a month later.
Mayor, City of Niagara Falls
With all due respect, sir, you as a legislator have to determine what the alternative arrangements could be. I would hope, and we would trust, that the hearing chair would allow for subjective decisions to be made to allow fairness and so that accurate information would be provided at a hearing. Once again, if an extension were to be required based upon the facts presented at the hearing, then that timeframe could be amended accordingly.