Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, we thank you for hearing us today on this important democratic exercise.
I am Marc Sougavinski. I am the CEO of an organization called the CSSS de la Montagne, a public health and social service organization in Montreal. Mrs. Marian Shermarke, our expert in immigration, is accompanying me.
The CSSS de la Montagne is a professional university organization of the Réseau de la santé et des services sociaux du Québec—Quebec's health and social services network—specializing in issues related to immigrants and refugees. The CSSS has a special program called PRAIDA. That is a service with over 60 years of experience and expertise in the reception and integration of asylum seekers. PRAIDA—formerly SARIM—brings together a team of workers and doctors that was created for the specific purpose of providing support and appropriate monitoring to asylum seekers, rather than leaving them to their own devices and without resources in Montreal.
In about 60 years, PRAIDA has dealt with over 350 claimants and has provided them with support. The experience is concrete. We are a public organization. We do not undermine government goals. We are state professionals, and we care about effectiveness and equality in the fast and fair provision of services, to paraphrase Minister Jason Kenney.
We agree with that.
Among other things, PRAIDA has agreements with all Canadian immigration services and works closely with border services. We want to take this opportunity to highlight the excellent co-operation between our services.
We also care about the protection of Canadians. We are against criminals and abuser of any kind, and we want to make sure that the money invested in the programs is invested in a way that is judicious and useful to Canadians. Finally, I want to specify that we are a health and social services organization. There are all kinds of needs in that area, and we are not looking for more work or an increase in human suffering. There is enough of that as it is.
So I hope no one will say that we somehow have some kind of conflict of interest in the matter.
What's disturbing about the bill is the image it conveys—it makes it seem as though most asylum seekers are swindlers and liars who absolutely need restrictive, even punitive, measures. There is the idea of good guys and bad guys, where most claimants are bad guys. We are thinking of those people whose claim is denied, for instance. That may be a popular belief that's easy to spread among uninformed crowds, but for people like us who have been receiving asylum seekers for 60 years, that is untrue.
There are certainly some people who abuse the system, but as in any area of human activity, such as politics, fraud and system abuse are not committed by the majority, even though popular belief may indicate so. Prisons are for criminals, and we agree with that. However, they are not a place for refugees, vulnerable individuals, mothers and their children—not even those who are 16 years old. The emphasis placed on imprisonment and the potential consequences for children make us very uncomfortable.
Also let's be honest: a jail is a jail. Don't believe those who will tell you that it's just a light form of detention. It's not what is happening. There's no such thing as light preventative jail time. A jail is a jail.
We are in agreement with having shorter delays for someone to receive an audience, but not to the point that it prevents the person someone from preparing their case.
Currently, the time frames are too short and even harm the so-called good refugees—if we are to follow that questionable logic.
We feel that it is unthinkable for Canada to consider imprisoning children or separating them from their parents. All of you are probably parents, and I am sure I don't need to explain that in detail. This measure makes no sense and must absolutely be corrected.
Ms. Shermarke will talk about more specific clinical issues.