Evidence of meeting #51 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was security.
A video is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
You know, as all of us at this committee know, that we will be studying Bill C-43 as soon as next week, potentially, in fact, if all things go well. No, sorry—it's the week when we come back after Thanksgiving.
I'm not sure why, when we're studying security, you would be specifically asking about a bill that you know is going to be coming before the committee. You'll be able to actually—potentially—invite Mr. Salter or Mr. Edelmann back to ask these questions.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims) NDP Jinny Sims
When I look at the questions that I have before me, they are related to border security. That's what we're taking a look at, and it's hard to delink deportation—the elements in the bill—from what we are studying today. That is why they're not very specific questions on clause-by-clause elements of it. These are general questions.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Well, you're in the chair, so I'll leave it. Just to keep in mind that I will bring this back up...your asking of very specific questions, as you said, and that you outlined, “What do you think of Bill C-43?” We won't need to have these two gentlemen back, then, for Bill C-43, if you're going to ask them questions about Bill C-43.
October 1st, 2012 / 3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Roxanne James Conservative Scarborough Centre, ON
I'm sorry. Did I hear that you're going to move on from that particular question since we are studying it in the coming weeks?
3:55 p.m.
NDP
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims) NDP Jinny Sims
I've heard the point that was made and I'm moving on.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
3:55 p.m.
NDP
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims) NDP Jinny Sims
I didn't necessarily agree, but as I'm in the chair, it's more awkward to disagree with myself or agree with myself, so....
Yes?
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Costas Menegakis Conservative Richmond Hill, ON
Perhaps you would want to consider, Madam Chair, stepping down and having the other vice-chair sit while you're asking your questions so that we don't have this awkward relationship with you when you do ask your questions.
4 p.m.
NDP
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims) NDP Jinny Sims
I did check this with the parliamentary secretary at first. I will be proceeding.
Since the year 2000, a number of Auditors General have been saying that the problem with who comes into the country and who gets deported is not really with the law, but with the administration of the law. Can you talk at all about the problems in coordination between the immigration service and the Canada Border Services Agency?
4 p.m.
Lawyer, As an Individual
In terms of the problems of coordination between the two with regard to the application of the law, I suppose I might not be necessarily in the best position....
I mean, I can comment on individual cases and in terms of my experience with respect to individual cases in terms of the priorities that are given to certain types of individuals or certain classes of individuals, and how those removals take place. For the most part, the tools exist in the law to be able to remove individuals who pose a danger to Canada.
In terms of how that law is applied, part of the challenge is that we have very broad sections in the law that can be applied in a varying number of ways. Take section 34, for example. It's a very, very broad section dealing with the security of Canada. I mean, Nelson Mandela would be inadmissible under section 34 if he weren't an honorary citizen. There are judgment calls made by individuals officers as to who they are going to use section 34 with.
Those choices are not, in my experience, particularly well coordinated in the sense that certain groups may be gone after for varying reasons, but that may not also be a standard across the country, where we see people from certain groups targeted in certain parts of the country and not in other parts of the country, or where how those decisions are made is actually not particularly clear, even to those of us practising within the area.
I don't know if that helps in answering your question, but in the sense of the coordination between...and I don't know if it's CIC and CBSA; I know there are some coordination challenges between those two organizations as well.
I don't know if that's what you were looking for.
4 p.m.
NDP
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims) NDP Jinny Sims
Thank you. The auditors have definitely pointed out those challenges, being very specific that the problems seem to lie more in the administration rather than the lack of laws or systems that we have in place.
We've often heard the minister talking about five sensational cases to illustrate the need for tougher rules around deportation. You're an expert who works within this system. How widespread are cases like these, and do you think making policy based solely on exceptional cases makes sense?
4 p.m.
Lawyer, As an Individual
For the most part, I would say that in these types of cases, part of the situation is that we don't always have the full picture of the cases that we're talking about—why the exact delay has happened, what the causes of the different delays were, what took place—and the overall picture of people's situations.
To give an example, I've had clients who have been here since the age of three months. They were born and raised in Canada. They've lived in Canada their whole lives, and, but for a decision by a parent or somebody at different points in their lives, they would be Canadian citizens.
Those people, when we're talking about their removal, often will be in a situation where they have children, they have families, and they're very well established here. To a certain extent, the reasons for their engagement with the criminal justice system are very much a product of Canadian society, in the sense that these are people, aside from being born here, who essentially were raised within Canadian society. Their situation is not much different from anybody else who engages in the criminal justice system.
So in terms of saying that we're going to be removing these people as a solution to the problem, ultimately we're foisting this problem onto another community. Whether or not that's right in the circumstances is something that we have mechanisms within the act to look at: let's look at all the factors, let's look at the humanitarian factors that surround the particular case.
Are there extreme cases where this maybe hasn't worked, or where there have been problems? There certainly are. But the question I would ask with respect to the minister's examples is what solutions could there have been had these cases been looked at under the current regime? In my submission, under the current act there are plenty of mechanisms to have dealt with those issues within those cases.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims) NDP Jinny Sims
Okay, thanks very much.
Now we're going to move on to my colleague, Costas Menegakis.
Oh, sorry. How could I forget my esteemed colleague, Monsieur Lamoureux? You have five minutes.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to pick up on the next generation visa, Mr. Salter, that you make reference to.
In your presentation you make reference to other countries. One gets the impression that there might be some validity to watch lists. We're not too sure, exactly, what that validity really is. In listening to you, I get the impression that we really need to be focusing our attention on the border control officers, the number of border control officers, for example, or immigration officers that we have, when people are entering the country. We need to be looking at the possibility of increasing those types of resources or putting more emphasis on that as an issue to make Canadians feel safer, while at the same time hopefully respecting the importance of freedom.
I'm wondering if you could comment on that in terms of a solution in trying to move forward. Is that really where we should be putting our emphasis, more people-type resources at our borders?
4:05 p.m.
Professor, School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
The developments in the American algorithms for generating watch lists and profiling are seeking more and more data, and are infringing more and more on the privacy of Americans, and indeed on all travellers through America.
I'm a pragmatist. My question is what security, value-added, do I get for that loss of privacy? It is not clear to me. I have not read any study that demonstrates that watch lists have been effective in deterring fraudulent asylum claims, deterring fraudsters, or deterring terrorist attacks. I don't know what security I'm gaining for that loss of privacy. I believe that when individuals are there making a decision on the ground, they have both a duty of care but also a personal engagement that is superior to a risk calculation.
If I could draw a clear parallel, risk algorithms say: we know very little about you, and that's a problem, we know nothing good about you, and that's a problem, or we know something good about you.
Canada, and other countries, like the U.S., like the U.K., like Israel, are trying trusted traveller programs. They say: we know a lot about you, so you can go through.
That sounds good, but Mohammed Atta would qualify for that program. He travelled all the time. He had valid documents. He was a frequent flyer. I don't know what extra security I'm getting for that loss of privacy.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Because of limited time, this will likely be my last question, and it's in regard to, again, the watch list.
As an academic, do you find that there is enough dialogue on the whole issue and the concept of watch lists? Have there been enough studies done on the issue? Do we maybe read too much importance into watch lists?
Can you provide some feedback or comment on to what degree you believe there has been enough dialogue on the true value of watch lists?
4:05 p.m.
Professor, School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
I really appreciate that question.
In my mind, the development of the passenger protect program and the permeability between American and Canadian watch lists have not been engaged in the public enough and have not been engaged in the policy realm enough. Without wanting to only speak about exceptional examples, the inability of Maher Arar to get off the American no-fly list seems indicative of the problems or the dynamics that we have if Canada uses the watch list of another country.
I think that's a really important question. Thank you.
4:10 p.m.
NDP
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims) NDP Jinny Sims
Thank you very much.
Now we'll go over to you, Costas Menegakis.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Costas Menegakis Conservative Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to thank our witnesses for being here with us today.
At the moment, as you know, we are studying security. It is something that is obviously very concerning to us as a government, as it is to all Canadians.
We want to make sure that the people who walk the streets in our communities, who shop in the places where we shop, who are around our families, our children, and our seniors, and who are around us, are people who we know do not pose a threat to society. There are a few things that, with implementation, we are hoping will assist. I'd like to get your opinion on some of them.
Are you familiar with the electronic travel authorization, the ETA, and the entry-exit provisions in the perimeter agreement we've signed to prevent foreign criminals from abusing our generous immigration system? Perhaps you can give me your opinion on whether you believe the ETA is a useful tool.
I'll start with you, Mr. Edelmann.