Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 3rd, 2012

[Sharalyn Jordan]

We see overseas protection as a complement to good inland protection, but not a replacement. Canada has an important role to play in upholding good standards of refugee protection for sexual orientation and gender identity claims. We should continue to pass measures that allow us to maintain those standards.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Thank you.

As you know, we passed the Balanced Refugee Reform Act last year. The Conservatives are now going back on their promise that they just praised only months ago. We know that the European Court of Human Rights, among others, has raised serious legal and human rights concerns about the list of safe countries.

Do you think that the complete ministerial discretion to designate countries as safe—

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Go ahead, Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

It's been an extremely long week of long hours of committee, but if I'm not mistaken, I just heard you say that the Conservatives went back on their promise. I don't think that's really appropriate language to use in this committee, because that's not exactly what's happened.

I'd like to clarify that, please.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You know, Ms. Sitsabaiesan, it's probably not a point of order, but it's not helpful to bait the government, because then they'll bait you. Then I'll lose control of the meeting, and we don't want that to happen, do we?

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

No.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

So try not to bait the government.

Thank you.

We'll start the clock again.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Do you think that the complete ministerial discretion to designate countries as safe will lead to further court challenges?

[Sharalyn Jordan]

Bill C-11, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, provided for consultation with human rights groups before a country could be designated. That's one of the measures that's been removed in Bill C-31.

So yes, I do see that as one of the problems with the way that the designated country list has been included in Bill C-31.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

With your experience, and I know you articulated some of your ideas, what recommendations do you have for fixing this bill? You spoke about some of your concerns with it. What are your recommendations to actually fix this bill to respond to the reality of LGBTQ refugees?

[Sharalyn Jordan]

Our brief outlines these in more detail. I'd also refer you to the brief by the Canadian Council for Refugees, as there are great parallels there.

Creating a system that protects the most vulnerable—women who are fleeing domestic violence, LGBT refugees—creates a system that works well for all refugees. Our suggestions include that we stay with the existing legislation in terms of the provisions under IRPA and now the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, although remove the screening interview at 15 days; and maintain the written basis of claim document and allow a decent amount of time. I think the CCR recommended 30 days. That would work for us.

I believe there's no need to legislate timelines, really. As long as the refugee board is well staffed, hearings will be scheduled. That's what's getting in the way, not lack of legislation.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to direct these questions to Mr. Deakin-Macey.

When we're talking about human smuggling—this seems to be your area of expertise, being on the west coast—I can't believe for a minute that the people involved in a human smuggling organization are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts. To get people out of one country and into another country, there has to be some sort of monetary benefit for a human smuggling operation and the people involved in it.

Could you speak a little about that, please?

[Michael Deakin-Macey]

Really it boils down to two kinds of profit motives.

First of all, yes, there is the monetary, but it may not be direct monetary. There's a simplistic one, where they have some kind of cash or money or a tradeable something, such as gold or whatever, and they pay for passage. That's very overt and above board.

The second issue that causes a lot of people a lot of concern is the fact that they put themselves in what amounts to indentured slavery when they get here in order to pay off the transit. For example, if they come from an area where English isn't a language that shows up on the language radar of the region, then in Canada they pretty much have to go to that ethnic community. This means that automatically, even if the Canadian government has intervened at some point in time, it puts them back on the radar to be tracked by the smugglers and told, “You have a debt to pay; you have to work it off.”

This amounts to years, potentially, of.... We've heard reports of $50,000 in transit fees that they would have to work off over years. If they refused or they didn't pay, there would either be a threat to them personally here in Canada or there would be a threat to family members remaining in their country of origin.

I think that's a big part of the challenge. I would say that the majority of them don't have the cash, and the majority of them, in my opinion, come into some form of “working it off”, if I can word it that way.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

That's very concerning, because if they're working it off here in Canada, obviously there are ties to organized crime here in Canada and other such things are going on that we don't want here on our shores—not only the criminality aspect of that particular issue but the human aspect of that issue. Someone, as you said, is now enslaved to these people who got them to this country.

I thank you for that answer. Going along this road, I have a quote from something else you said:

We are pleased that the Government has sent a clear message that it will not be tolerated, and we welcome the introduction of legislation preventing human smugglers from in effect creating an unfair two-tier immigration system, one for the impatient rich and the other for the honest applicant.

In your speech earlier, you talked about the “poor, quiet people” in countries waiting for a yes or no answer.

[Michael Deakin-Macey]

Absolutely.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

And I'm sure that's what this quote ties into.

[Michael Deakin-Macey]

Correct.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Would you like to elaborate a bit more on that? Because you know what, there are hundreds of thousands of refugees around this world, sitting in UNHCR camps waiting patiently to get a positive “yes” answer to come to a country like Canada, and we have others who are making ties with organized crime and coming in through the back door. Do you think that's fair?

[Michael Deakin-Macey]

You have to divorce yourself from the individual cases sometimes and come up a little bit in terms of how you look at it. The challenge becomes one of trying to treat people the same as they work their way through it. Sorry, I had a mental lapse, could you—

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I think we have enough answer there.

I just want to speak for a moment to Ms. Morrissey and Ms. Jordan.

I can't remember who said it, but you referenced a particular case from Pakistan and the fact that they may not get a fair process, or whatever the case was that you were talking about. I just wanted to clarify that with regard to designation of safe countries there are certain qualitative and quantitative factors that are involved in the designation. The minister cannot just designate a country, it has to be based on stuff that is in legislation and also outlined....

I'm just going to give an example. Sixty per cent or more of total asylum claims from the country are withdrawn or abandoned by the claimants. The second one is that 75% or more of the total asylum claims from the country are rejected by the independent Immigration and Refugee Board. So when you're talking about cases like Pakistan, are people coming from Pakistan who are refugees abandoning their claims in droves like some other countries from the European Union? I'm just wondering if you were thinking this applied to that particular country.

[Christine Morrissey]

No, certainly they don't.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you. That's all I needed to know. I just wanted to make sure that we understood that.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Mr. Menegakis.