Citizenship and Immigration Committee on March 1st, 2012

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

I thank both presenters for their presentations. I do have a few questions that I'm hoping to get off.

First, to continue with what Mr. Opitz was referring to, Mr. Petryshyn, you talked about the employer and how there is no obligation for the immigrant or the worker to actually contact the employer. Equally, there's no obligation, from what I understand, for the employer to make contact, whether it's with Human Resources or the Department of Immigration.

Outside of the transportation industry, if we take a look at the temporary workers that are coming to Canada, there really is no recording system...? Can you elaborate? Are you aware of any recording system so that we can say, out of the 100,000-plus workers coming to Canada, whether or not they're actually working where they were initially meant to be working? Can you provide a comment on that?

[John Petryshyn]

The only thing is that when they do come to a port of entry, they then are recorded as to whether they have proper documentation—a student visa, a worker visa, or a visitor visa—or whether they are a permanent resident with all the requisite documentation. If they simply come in here.... Don't forget, the last step in the whole process of obtaining the worker permit is that your employer already has been approved in Canada to qualify to hire a foreign worker.

In Manitoba, (a) they're registered with the Province of Manitoba, and (b) they go through the whole list of advertising for workers in that field who have certain skills. They have to do it online in the Job Bank. They have to provide a list of all the people who have applied for that job in Canada and have been turned down for one reason or another. Only then does Service Canada permit the employer to offer employment to a foreign worker overseas, who, with his or her application, applies and comes to Canada.

It's a long process.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

That's right.

[John Petryshyn]

That was referenced by a previous member of Parliament in regard to the government trying to expedite it—and God, I hope you do expedite it—because this goes on forever.

Then, at the end of the day when the person shows up at the border, there may be harassment of the employer; they want all these other requirements to back it up, but the employers don't have that available because they simply didn't anticipate the guy coming at that time. Or, at the end of the day, he doesn't show up and there's no documentation. Like I say, Human Resources and Immigration should work hand in hand, as opposed to isolated—

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

I'm just going to stop you there for a second. Again, what I'm trying to get at is that there appears to be no system when a worker comes to Canada, or once that working visa has been issued, there's no system that shows the worker actually came to Canada, where it's recorded.... Even for the employer, there is no obligation for them to say to Human Resources or Immigration that they have arrived, correct?

[John Petryshyn]

That's correct, Mr. Lamoureux.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

In regard to the marriages of convenience, you make reference to the fact—and I'm familiar with the policy that the government was talking about—that there's the status quo and that's really caused a great deal of concern about marriages of convenience. Are you aware of other possible options that would address the issue of marriages of convenience and that the government would actually be able to look at as a policy?

[John Petryshyn]

What could be similar, which was cut off a few years ago, was that fiancées were considered members of the family class, and they were able to be sponsored to Canada, on the proviso that within a certain period of time they must marry the person who sponsored them to Canada. If they failed to do that, they would be removed from Canada.

The only difficulty was that upon coming to Canada, the fiancée was conditionally landed and had all the benefits of the courts and legal process and could say, “I don't like the way he parts his hair”—or whatever it was—“so I'm not going to marry him.” That's where the problem came in. But I raise that by way of the fact that if you issue the conditional landing, regardless of the family background—whether it's a marriage of convenience or a marriage that was contracted, and today some people even get married by telephone under some religions—you would therefore allow the spouse to come to Canada on condition that the immigration department would be satisfied that the people are still cohabiting. Then you could interview both of them, as opposed to doing an interview of a spouse overseas and asking, “Do you intend to live with your spouse in Canada?” This way you could say, “Okay, where do you live? Do you live together?”

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I have to stop. We've run out of time.

Mr. Menegakis.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Dr. Dauvergne and Mr. Petryshyn, for joining us today.

I have a couple of questions. Hopefully I'll be able to get them in within the allotted time.

Our government has announced that it is developing an entry-exit data system with the United States. It is to begin in September 2012, with the exchange of information on third-party nationals and permanent residents at select entry points. The goal, of course, is to expand it to air travel by 2014. What is your opinion of this strategy?

Can we start with you, Dr. Dauvergne? And then we'll go to Mr. Petryshyn.

[Dr. Catherine Dauvergne]

I think the question of entry-exit data exchange is one that needs to be dealt with very carefully. I think it's important to develop a regulatory framework to ensure that data collected for the purposes of entering the country are not put into a generally accessible databank. I think that comes very close to the line of infringing upon individuals' privacy rights, and it's not clear what benefits will derive from the system, aside from having a massive pool of data for which the uses are really not clear.

I think there are a lot more details about that proposal that really need to be spelled out and dealt with so that we can ensure that individuals' rights—privacy rights essentially—are adequately protected in the program. There are some ways, but it's hard to see how you could build enough protections into that system to outweigh the risks. There's always a risk when government is collecting a massive amount of data, and a huge cost that goes with administering that data, just for no particular reason. The reasons to have that data would need to be very carefully articulated in the law and scrutinized by the public.

Thank you.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

I have the same question for you.

[John Petryshyn]

The issue is that we're dealing with Canadian and American entries and exits. Let's leave aside our good friends in the United States and just look at it from this point of view. Here we are in Canada, and we have documentation of people entering Canada. We don't have any documentation of them exiting Canada, unless there is removal by way of a deportation order, so that person is put on an airplane and removed. If it's a voluntary departure, you don't know if he or she has gone. Never mind tying ourselves to the U.S.; we don't have our own ducks lined up in Canada. When we know that someone has a three-month visitor's visa and they apply for a six-month extension and don't get it, nobody follows up and says, “Hey, maybe he's still here.” That's where the problem lies, that we ourselves don't do any proper documentation.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Do I still have some time, Mr. Chair? Thank you.

What we're studying here in the committee at this time is security, particularly as it relates to immigration, to people coming into our country. Really, I'd like to get your views on that. What are your views or some of the recommendations you might have that strike the right balance between the security of Canadians and their civil liberties?

[John Petryshyn]

One of the most simple ways to deal with it is that if you have, for example, a six-month visitor visa, you should report to an immigration office or service and identify yourself as still being in Canada or not being in Canada. Or, if your time has expired, you may have been deemed to have overstayed, and you would put on the list that you are subject to removal.

People don't come in and expect to be simply in Canada without any documentation. Some people might consider that—

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Petryshyn, I have limited time, and I really want to get to the bottom of my question.

[John Petryshyn]

Yes.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

My question is simply this. We're exchanging information with our other partners, with other countries, so that we can gather as much information as possible about people who want to come to this country. This is to protect Canadians, to protect Canada, to ensure that the people who are coming here are the right people who should be coming to Canada. So there is some concern about privacy infringement and so forth, but there has to be a balance between people's civil liberties and the right of our country to ensure that the right people are coming here.

Dr. Dauvergne, you alluded a little bit to the privacy issue. Would you care to comment further on any recommendations you would have so that we can strike a balance that's fair to everyone?

[Dr. Catherine Dauvergne]

In the interests of time, I think the Maher Arar report is directly on the point of how we decide which information to exchange about.

Now, keep in mind that entry and exit information will predominantly be information about people who already have a right to live in Canada—Canadian citizens and permanent residents. The Arar report was a good example. I think we should only be tracking people where we really have some grounds to suspect there's actually some sort of issue. Otherwise, it's a tremendous public expenditure with enormous risks, which is not justified, in my mind.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

But aren't the risks even greater if the wrong people come to Canada? I mean, it's a question that can't be answered very easily.

How's my time, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You have a minute.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Okay.

What are ways in which the government can fairly distinguish between those who come legally and illegally into Canada? Would you care to comment on that, on some ways of distinguishing between someone coming legally and illegally?

[Dr. Catherine Dauvergne]

Anybody who is crossing at an organized port of entry is probably coming legally or they'll be turned back at that point, so I guess your question is about clandestine border crossings...?

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Well, let me delve into it differently. The issue of biometrics is something that's been discussed quite extensively. How do you feel about biometrics and the type of information that can really identify who the person is who is trying to come through the border crossing?

[Dr. Catherine Dauvergne]

Okay. That's helpful.

I think a lot of countries around the world have gone to some sort of biometric screening. The real issue that concerns me there is what we do with that data once we get it.

I think Canada has done an excellent job of reducing its clandestine population. The figures are absolutely striking at how low the illegal population is in Canada compared to Europe, the United States, and even in some.... It's not the same in Australia.

Largely we've achieved this through having a refugee system that encourages people to identify themselves to the state. The fingerprinting, the photographing of people coming over the border, which is currently done for many—you will have seen it going into the United States—is a big resource strain for a very small yield.

So I think resourcing our intelligence agencies so that we know who we're looking for is probably a better use of scarce dollars.