Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 24th, 2012

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I'm asking you nicely to stick to the bill.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

The minister may be willing to answer the question.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I'd prefer that you stick to the bill, Ms. Sims, please.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you very much, Chair. I will respect your decision.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

A point of order, Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I was just going to ask if I could have my 30 seconds back.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I don't know what's got into this committee today. I'm having a rough time.

Ms. Sims, you have the floor.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you very much.

Minister, the new law you have presented, and the one we are going to start debating here, relieves the Minister of Immigration—and I find that an interesting word—from the obligation to consider humanitarian and compassionate considerations at the request of a foreign national.

Is this the kind of Canada we want? Why would the government want to relieve you of considering the best interests of children in possible deportation cases? Would you be open to considering amendments to protecting vulnerable children?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

I invite you to table any amendments that you think are appropriate. I don't understand your particular concern, but if you have reasonable amendments, we always give them a good look.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Minister, thank you. Once again, I was taken by the language in that piece of the legislation where it talks about relieving you of that responsibility.

The other question I have, and I'll try to stick to this and not to the flyers that went out, is that the minister has underlined half a dozen cases of extreme repeat non-citizen criminals who have gone on to commit serious crimes while delaying their deportation. Is removing the right to an appeal really the only way these cases could have been prevented, or did you examine other options?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Yes, we have examined other options, and I think there are probably additional reforms that are necessary. I have been talking to my colleague, the Minister of Public Safety, for example, about both operational and perhaps legislative changes that would ensure we can more quickly remove a foreign criminal towards the end of their sentence.

Before they are released from custodial sentence, we might want to look at how we can ensure we can move them through the removal process much more quickly. Part of this is an operational challenge; it's like getting travel documents from foreign governments. But just as a matter of principle, I don't think that once a foreign national has been defined as inadmissible...I generally don't think they should be back on the streets in Canada. In principle, I think we should take the paddy wagon from the prison to the airplane.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you, Minister.

Do you agree that removing the right to an appeal could in fact lead to even more judicial backlogs? It would remove any incentive for the accused to plead guilty, thus prolonging court proceedings.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

No. The length of court proceedings is a challenge, obviously, for those who administer the criminal justice system. There are all sorts of reasons why people seek delays. I know many of the provincial attorneys general are dealing with that.

I want to make one correction, though. Earlier I said that the immigration lawyers were opposed to the bill. I meant to say “some” immigration lawyers. I have a number here, including one of Mr. Lamoureux's constituents, whom I think he knows—Reis Pagtakhan—who supports this bill. For example, Ravi Jain said, “It's extremely popular. The public is very much onboard with this.”

I want to thank those immigration lawyers who have supported this sensible change.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Of course, Minister, you also want to thank those lawyers who want to work with you and the opposition in trying to make this bill more effective, more fair, and all of those things, because I know those are the kinds of policies you do welcome, right?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Yes.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Another thing that I've been dealing with, with a number of constituents in my riding, is that filling an application to immigrate to Canada can be a lengthy and challenging process. As you know, in many countries, that filling-out process is handled by people other than the applicants, because of literacy skills and because the forms are quite complicated. When you're filling out those forms, the potential for making honest mistakes is ever present. I tend to have senior moments every now and then, and I know that in one particular case—not on my immigration form, I don't want to be deported tomorrow—instead of putting 0706 under the year I was born, I managed to invert it in my head and put 0607. Those kinds of mistakes are not what I would call your pre-judged “I'm going to do this” kinds of things.

Another example I will use is names. I don't know if you're familiar with this, but in a lot of countries outside North America, many names are used for the same person. I just want to talk about one of my brothers.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We're running out of time.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Okay.

My question is, when you look at some of these mistakes, which can be just honest mistakes, don't you believe the five-year inadmissibility to be an overly punitive measure for what could be a very honest mistake that you and I could make?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

No, it's not about honest mistakes; it's about a deliberate intention to mislead.

I'll let Mr. Linklater explain.

[Les Linklater, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, I would draw attention to the wording in section 40 of IRPA, which lays out the parameters around misrepresentation. In part, it reads that misrepresentation relates to the withholding of material facts that relate to a relevant matter “that induces or could induce an error in the administration of this Act”.

Simply forgetting to tick a box or transcribing numbers or letters in a different manner than would actually be the case would not be conducive to a material fact relevant to the case.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Mr. Minister, I want to thank you for coming. I hope you and your colleagues found it as interesting as we did. We appreciate it very much.

We are going to suspend for a few minutes and then go in camera to meet for just a couple of minutes.

[Proceedings continue in camera]