Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 9th, 2010

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Go ahead, sir.

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

I'm going to withdraw that amendment. At first, I want to make sure that the people who review the applications at the first level come from inside and outside. This question has been raised a number of times. There was an exchange of letters between the minister and the Commission chair, and I'm satisfied with that. So I don't see the need to introduce it.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Okay, he's withdrawing that.

NDP-13.1, Ms. Chow.

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

My motion is very similar to the Bloc motion. It's the same thing. I wanted to make sure that who we hire are the best, whether it's internally or externally.

I've been assured that's going to take place. It's part of the routine procedures, that they would seek internally and then go out. If they can't find anyone, they would go out externally. It is under the mandate of the chairperson, and those letters that were provided to us already exclusively said so, so I no longer need to move this motion.

(Clause 26 agreed to)

(On clause 27)

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

On clause 27, we have the government amendment G-7.

Mr. Dykstra.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Yes. So moved.

(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Shall clause 27 as amended carry?

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

No, no. Chair, I have one more amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I haven't got to G-8 yet. G-8 will come in a new clause.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

It will? Okay.

(Clause 27 as amended agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We are on to a new clause, clause 27.1, and that is a government amendment.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So moved.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Just give me one second.

Ms. Chow.

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

I assume this is now going to centralize all the PRRA applications from the protection officers, the division, so that they can gain the benefit of staff that already have the expertise in this area. So it's an efficiency motion, which I think is worthy of support.

Am I correct in that assumption?

[John Butt, Manager, Program Development, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

Yes.

This is part of the package of amendments that go to moving the pre-removal risk assessment process from the department to the board. It basically sets up a parallel set of procedural rules for the Refugee Protection Division with respect to applications for protection--i.e., PRRA. That's as opposed to the previous section 170, which dealt with the procedural rules with respect to refugee protection claims.

So it's basically a parallel provision that makes the distinctions with respect to the pre-removal risk assessment process.

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

Mr. Chair, can I just ask them...?

Right now, I think the officers can do PRRA, like two a day or something. It's very slow. Do you envision that once this transfer takes place, it would be a lot faster? Perhaps because people already have the expertise, they can certainly process more cases?

[John Butt]

I think the biggest benefit is that the Immigration and Refugee Board has a comprehensive infrastructure for supporting the decision-making with respect to pre-removal risk assessments, if they do them.

Today, a pre-removal risk assessment officer at the Department of Citizenship and Immigration is responsible for doing their own research, their own file management, their own management of their schedule. All of that activity at the Immigration and Refugee Board will be centralized and maintained by the research unit at the board and by the scheduling units at the board. So it should be more efficient and therefore the officers there should be more productive than the officers could possibly be at CIC.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Coderre.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

I have two questions, Mr. Chairman.

First of all, this amendment states:

170.1 In respect of an application for protection under subsection 112(1), the Refugee Protection Division (a) may inquire into any matter that it considers relevant...

That's a lot of power. What do you mean by the expression "any matter"?

[John Butt]

That is a general provision.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Open bar?

[John Butt]

No, I don't think it includes open bars.

It's basically the general rule of procedure that's available to the division when it's dealing with pre-removal risk assessment. It's virtually the same wording that you will find in section 170, with respect to their proceedings when they're dealing with refugee protection claims.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Secondly, Mr. Chair, I wasn't there, but I read the verbatim regarding the relationship with PRRA under the new IRB and the function of a member of Parliament. I don't know if it's under that and if there will be some regulation. I know that as a member of Parliament we were able to intervene vis-à-vis PRRA under CBSA, right?

The IRB is now a quasi-judicial tribunal. An MP may not intervene in a quasi-judicial tribunal. What assurances can you give me? Sometimes an action that we have to take as an MP, as a legislator, really makes a difference with regard to that agency. Does that mean we can no longer make submissions now?