Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Dec. 3rd, 2012

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you all for coming again. I can see that a lot of great work is going into this from the different departments and that you are looking at the years ahead as biometrics and everything finally get rolled out.

As we know, in Bill C-31, our friends across voted against biometric provisions.

Les, can you tell us why biometric information is important and how it's going to help with the protection and safety of all Canadians overall?

[Les Linklater]

Biometric information is a real game changer in terms of allowing departments and agencies like ours to be able to lock in the identity of individuals who present themselves for a service. Given the advances in technology and the fact that fraud and malfeasance are becoming equally developed in terms of the use of technology, locking in identity is really central to being able to provide efficient client service and facilitation, as I mentioned at the outset, but also to ensure we are able to manage the risks as efficiently as possible through the use of technology.

With biometrics, our vision would be that once an individual has provided their biometrics and a visa is issued—or an ETA well in the future, but starting with the visa issuance with biometrics—and when that person applies again for another Canadian visa, we'll be able to lock in their identity through the provision of biometrics with that renewal application. It should make the issuance of the document that much easier, if there have been no infractions in Canada or no adverse information has come to light since that first application. It should make the assessment of applications that much easier, and for clients, again, at a level of client service and facilitation that we can't always accommodate now, given the need, in many instances, to actually invoke an interview to ensure that we're actually dealing with the same person we have dealt with previously.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

In your experience, because you did do your research—and I think you mentioned it in one or two instances—for the countries that employ this now, are you finding that their results generally have been good and positive?

[Les Linklater]

Absolutely. I think from a facilitation angle, as Ms. Edlund has mentioned, there are a number of interests, including some in the tourism industry, that would actually applaud the use of biometrics in a number of markets, because it does then allow them to manage, with certainty, the travel of individuals to Canada because we are able to lock in their identity.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

That, by the way, I like, because you're looking forward into industries that do affect Canada, like tourism, and you're taking that into account within the whole system. I think that makes a tremendous amount of sense, and obviously it's a lot of good work on your part, so thank you for that.

On exit control, what do you think of the consequences of Canada not having an exit control system overall?

[Les Linklater]

It's been interesting in the past to see a number of criticisms from the Auditor General, for example—I think in her 2009 report, or 2008—signalling that this is a gap in our enforcement tool kit, not knowing how many failed claimants were still in Canada, for example, or who had not been removed.

As well, with entry and exit information from an immigration enforcement perspective, it's just understanding how many temporary foreign workers or students are here who are still in status or who may be overstaying. Again, I think that helps CBSA in particular understand just what the situation is on the ground.

More generally, the minister has been quite active in terms of talking about investigations into citizenship fraud, based on residency and the fact that individuals have not been physically in Canada for an extended period of time prior to a citizenship application. Entry and exit information in full deployment will allow us, from a CIC perspective, to ensure that individuals who are applying for citizenship are actually meeting residency requirements and therefore have formed, in our view, an attachment to Canada that would then allow us to move forward with the citizenship application.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Okay.

How are we screening high-risk countries presently, and how are we mitigating any risks to us today? Perhaps you can make the comparison on how we will be able to accomplish this. What do you think the overall impact will be once all of the measures are in place and implemented? How will our screening processes differ and improve?

[Les Linklater]

I'll start and then ask colleagues from CBSA to fill in.

Essentially, as I said, CIC is the first line overseas in terms of receiving the visitor visa application. Under protocols that we have with public safety agencies, there are requirements for mandatory referrals of a number of types of applications that take a certain amount of time. CBSA, as the focal point, works with partner agencies to conduct those checks and then provides advice back to CIC for the officer to make the final determination and decision.

Right now that does take time, and in some countries, if there are spikes in volume, service standards suffer. Our view would be that as we move to more electronic means—locking in identity through biometrics, for example, improving our electronic connections with and between the public safety partners—we'll be able to turn those decisions around much more quickly.

I'll ask my CBSA colleagues to add to that if they have anything to offer.

[Geoffrey Leckey]

Thanks, Les.

Yes, high-risk countries tend to have a visa requirement. When a visa application is received, the first thing to happen is that the CIC immigration officer overseas makes an assessment of whether the applicant appears to meet certain indicators that might suggest suspicion of membership in a criminal or terrorist organization, or whether there is any other reason why a person might be excluded from Canada.

Those indicators are developed together with our security partners, led by CBSA. An ongoing working group examines country by country the indicators that apply in that country that might suggest a person needs to undergo closer security screening. This would then become a referral to CBSA. Within the last year, we've updated our country indicators for 16 high-priority countries, and 10 more are on the list for this year.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Mr. Leung, you have time for one question.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

My question has to do with information sharing. Right now we share information with the Five Country Conference. Are plans in place for other countries like Japan, Hong Kong, and Singapore? As those countries come on board, will we also be sharing countries with them, like Germany or France? I was just wondering which direction we're heading in.

[Les Linklater]

We do share information with the Five Country Conference partners. It is on a fairly circumscribed and limited basis, 3,000 records a month, to a server that Australia hosts. Essentially, what we share are the biometrics. If there are matches, then there are case-by-case follow-ups. Our databases are not accessible to other countries directly, and vice versa.

Our first priority is fulfilling the commitment under the perimeter strategy to ensure systematic, biographic information sharing with the United States. This is simple tombstone data in the first instance, moving to biometric sharing once biometrics is up and running. But at this point, given the privacy principles announced as part of the perimeter strategy provisions of the Privacy Act, this is where our work on information sharing is going to pause for the time being.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Perhaps you could comment on temporary status. There will be a lot of people coming in. If we look at even 10% of, let's say, China's population, that will be about 15 million people. I'm just wondering whether you have technology to handle the volume of data that needs to be in our database.

[Dawn Edlund]

I can speak to that.

We have seen a large increase of tourism business from China compared with that of last year. We're up in the neighbourhood of 35% over the number of applications we had last year.

We've been taking a number of steps with our global case management system to share work across our network. Offices in Hong Kong may not be quite as busy as those in Beijing, so Hong Kong is picking up some of the work for Beijing.

Where people have gone to visa application centres, those applications are transferred securely by electronic means. Work is done to prepare the file to get it decision-ready in Ottawa while Beijing is sleeping. Then, when Beijing wakes up the next morning, it has a raft of files ready to work on. So we've been using technology to that extent.

We are looking forward to, in not too long a time, just another couple of weeks, e-applications being available for temporary resident applicants. That will be another game changer for us. The more we can get the information and the applications in electronically, the more we will be able to shift the work around.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Ms. Sitsabaiesan.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The Auditor General's report highlighted concerns with CIC and CBSA. The report states that there is little training or formal training curriculum. Furthermore, the report also states “...there was little stability at the senior levels to provide coaching and on-the-job training”.

There was also a lack of coordination of efforts between the departments, and no quality assurance framework or performance reviews, so you were not working together as much as the Auditor General would like to have seen.

When it comes to securing our borders, we are changing the law today without addressing the problems, which have been identified over and over again, that currently exist in the administration of the law. The government needs to address the lack of training and resources, integration of information, and monitoring technologies within the responsibilities of our public service agencies.

When the minister appeared before this committee on October 24 he stated:

I take seriously the recommendations of the Auditor General. My department has accepted them all and either has already started to implement or will implement the recommendations that she made.

Can you share the details of the progress that has been made by your agency in addressing the AG's concerns with regard to training, quality assurance, and performance reviews?

[Les Linklater]

I will start and then Mr. Hill will have more substantive comments to add.

Essentially, the minister's comments are completely accurate. The two departments have agreed to a management response and action plan in response to the recommendations of the Auditor General. Quite a lot of detailed work between the two departments has taken place to address them. Many of the issues have already been addressed.

Specifically, a regular governance structure has been put on top of the management of the relationship and the memorandum of understanding between CIC and CBSA, with complete renegotiation and updating of all the annexes that form the specific coordination of activities between the two agencies.

Mr. Hill is prepared to add more detail.

[Peter Hill]

Thank you very much.

Just to follow what Les said, under the MOU a very robust initiative is under way to establish joint dashboards for senior management and management at all levels to track the performance of the programs, to track the indicators of program performance, and to feed that reporting into management decisions on future strategies, whether it's for legislative change, policy improvements, or program improvements.

A lot has been done across the board in the areas that you mentioned since the Auditor General assessed our activities. For example, there are now well-established quality assurance programs and processes in a number of important areas highlighted by the Auditor General. For example, the detentions program is now subject to a quality assurance program. Similarly, the criminal investigations program has a cycle of program assessments in the regions to ensure that priorities are being addressed, that resources are being devoted to highest-risk areas, and that performance on case management is being tracked regularly.

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

I'm going to interrupt you for a second because it seems that a lot of work has been done.

[Peter Hill]

A lot has been done.

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

This is good to hear, because we know the AG's reports over time have been making similar recommendations over and over again.

If you have the AG's recommendations written down, and the changes that have happened since then, could you give them to us? I'm a very visual person, and for me it's much better on paper. Are you able to give that to the clerk?

[Peter Hill]

Absolutely, that undertaking was made last time, and I know that written documentation is being prepared and will be submitted.

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

Okay, that's fabulous.

Is the MOU publicly available? It is? Okay.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Aspin, it's good to have you on the committee. I hope you're enjoying yourself.

[Jay Aspin, Conservative, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

I sure am.