Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Dec. 15th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Your time is up.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

I'm done?

Perhaps I will get back to this later.

[Claudette Deschênes]

I just wanted to add that, during the crisis, while there was a special program in place, we waived the applications fees. We will still check this.

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

Let's talk about the special program, which the government discreetly announced, on August 31, would come to an end on September 1, at midnight. I imagine that, even though the announcement was low-profile, it was not a surprise, since that date had been selected from the outset as the end date of the program. The program had guarantees as far as processing timeframes go and, among others, the waiving of processing fees and so on.

Why did the government not renew the special program? Was it because it felt that the situation in Haiti had improved and that the program was no longer needed?

[Claudette Deschenes]

The recommendation was based on the fact that we had fast-tracked most of the applications deemed to have been filed as a result of the earthquake. So people were given enough time to file their application.

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

You determined, then, that the processing times, the commitments you had made to limit processing times, were no longer necessary, that those who could not afford the fees had already filed their applications and that any new applications would come from people who could afford the fees. Was that more or less your assessment?

[Claudette Deschênes]

From an operations standpoint, we found that the 12-week processing commitment made us counter-productive. We were chasing down files and responses, which usually would have been received a week later if we had given people more time. We found that that kind of decision making and the 12-week commitment were not all that useful. We were not doing what we wanted to do, that is, processing files in a productive manner.

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

With respect to fees, you determined that people had been given the chance to submit their applications, and that it was time to reinstate the fees.

[Claudette Deschênes]

We determined that we had provided an appropriate window of time.

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

What concerns me most about the end of the special measures program is the fact that the labour market opinion will no longer be waived—once again, I know the term in English, labour market opinion or LMO, but I forget what it is called in French. Perhaps you heard me talking about it this week during the emergency debate. Those who are already here are, to some extent, stuck here. It is my understanding that the moratorium on removals to Haiti has been maintained.

Is that indeed the case? No one is being sent back to Haiti yet, correct? But these people may not be able to renew or obtain temporary work permits. So it may be hard for them to survive. What is the logic behind maintaining the moratorium on removals, while potentially preventing a certain number of people from earning enough money to support themselves while in Canada?

[Claudette Deschênes]

The problem is that we are bound to respect the act. Right now, we are complying with the act, as it stands, while trying to figure out what else we can do.

The moratorium on removals has to do with another issue, in my opinion. We are not telling people that they cannot find work. Instead we are saying that these are the mechanisms available to us under the program as it exists today.

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

The fact remains that without a work permit, people cannot look for a job. They need a work permit.

Furthermore, you mentioned the act. During the eight months following the earthquake, until September 1, the labour market opinion was waived for Haitian nationals already in Canada at the time of the earthquake who applied for a new work permit or a temporary work permit renewal. Since that was allowed for eight months, it must have been feasible. Was it legal?

[Claudette Deschênes]

We were able to waive the requirement under a special program.

Mr. Chair, I'm not sure I can answer that question in much more detail. It is a policy decision and a ministerial decision.

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

I am trying to understand why a ministerial exemption was granted for eight months but is no longer allowed. Does that not make it illegal? It is a policy issue. So you simply went ahead and applied the measure under which the requirement would no longer be waived, under which people would from then on have to apply for a labour market opinion.

Despite all of that, do you exercise some flexibility in terms of applying that measure, or do you follow the regular procedure, in other words, the same one that applies to a Mexican worker who comes to Canada as to a Haitian worker who is already in Canada? Do you handle both applications in the same way, or do you allow for some flexibility?

[Claudette Deschênes]

I would say that we try to show some flexibility from an operational standpoint. But I cannot say that is what happens with every case.

[Rénald Gilbert]

I would add that a number of the work permits that we issued are still valid. Since they covered longer periods, many people still have valid work permits. In addition, it is always possible to obtain a labour market opinion—I, too, am trying to figure out the term in French—as is the case for other nationals, many of whom continue to be subject to the removal measures.

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

Does the requirement to obtain a labour market opinion or LMO—I found the French term in the document—apply only to Haitians seeking new temporary work permits, or does it also apply to those wanting to renew the temporary work permit they already have?

[Claudette Deschênes]

Only to renewals.

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

Fine. So some people can still afford to survive in Canada, knowing that they are, to some extent, prisoners here. They cannot return to Haiti. No matter what, there is a moratorium on their removal. Right now, they are allowed to work, but eventually that may no longer be the case.

[Rénald Gilbert]

I should clarify that people are not required to stay here.

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

I understand that. But if you impose a moratorium on removals to Haiti, it must have something to do with the fact that you find it difficult to send people back there given the country's current situation. So it is assumed that they would want to stay here for an extended period. We do not want to make the situation in Haiti worse. I agree with you: they can go back. Regardless, it is understood that we should keep them, at least until things become a bit more stable. Yet we are putting them in a situation where they may no longer be able to support themselves. We tell them that they can stay here but that they may not have the ability to support themselves.

[Claudette Deschênes]

Most of them probably came here because they had family in Canada.

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

So their families will take care of them during that time.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Welcome to the immigration committee, Mr. Dewar.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

It's good to see you, Chair.