Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Dec. 3rd, 2012

[Les Linklater]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Ms. Freeman.

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Thank you, Chair.

Thanks to our witnesses for being here.

During the study we heard several witnesses express their concern with our current system of inadmissibility on security grounds, arguing that our security provisions are overly broad and this ends up capturing the wrong people, with possibly devastating consequences to their lives. One of the key findings of the Auditor General's November 2011 report concluded that visa officers did not have access to updated tools to help in their inadmissibility determinations. Some of the challenges discussed in committee included the lack of timely information, the lack of danger assessments prior to inadmissibility determinations, and an inconsistency between the indicators of admissibility and actual security threats to Canada.

My first question is, could you please comment on these gaps in our current admissibility system?

[Les Linklater]

I believe Ms. Edlund will be able to respond.

[Dawn Edlund]

I think where I would start is with the concept of the bilateral irritants that have been caused in relation to our inadmissibility provisions. We know that our provisions are broad. They were deliberately drafted to be very broad, and with a fine mesh net, so we could make sure people who were inadmissible on grounds of genocide, hate crimes, espionage, etc., couldn't slip through. But because of the membership provisions, largely, that has resulted in capturing people for whom some would say, “How on earth could that person be inadmissible?” Nelson Mandela, for example—how on earth could Nelson Mandela be inadmissible to Canada?

In the fall of 2010 Minister Kenney issued a new public policy that allowed us to have another facilitation measure for individuals such as Mr. Mandela, were he to apply. Yes, technically, he's inadmissible under the legislation, or someone like him, but because it's in Canada's national interest to be able to admit that person, under that public policy a temporary resident visa can be issued to an applicant, instead of what we used to use, which was a temporary resident permit. We knew that people were quite offended by getting a temporary resident permit before, so this has now facilitated admission to Canada. They get a regular document that looks like that of every other traveller, despite being technically inadmissible under our broad provisions.

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

What's the process for making that happen, essentially?

[Dawn Edlund]

The process is similar to what colleagues have described. Applications are received and initial looks are done using the security indicators we've been updating. If a file needs to be referred for a further inadmissibility look, then that goes from the visa officer to the Canada Border Services Agency. They give us their advice and recommendation as to that inadmissibility, and if there is an inadmissibility found and we have that national interest component, then we go ahead and issue a public policy TRV.

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

One witness during the study suggested that the decisions on admissibility on security grounds vary depending on what visa officer is making the decision. What measures are in place to ensure consistent interpretation of the provisions?

[Dawn Edlund]

We have ongoing training for our officers, both in Canada and overseas, to make sure they're getting a degree of consistency in the way in which they approach the provisions. We work very closely, obviously, with CBSA and other security partners to make sure we're all on the same page—what that provision means and how it is applied in practice with real-life cases.

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

How can we ensure that CIC and CBSA have the resources they need to keep out individuals who are actually posing a threat to security in Canada without casting such a wide net? We are obviously worried that we could be unintentionally harming people and going through a procedure that sometimes might be a bit long and may put people at risk. How can we ensure that these resources are available without spreading such a wide net?

[Dawn Edlund]

I would say that, at least for the public policy temporary resident visa process—I'm personally involved in those because I actually authorize them—it can be a pretty quick process in terms of a case being identified, a quick look by CBSA, and then the paperwork being done to have that person be allowed to come to Canada. Frequently, they have actually no knowledge that behind the scenes this is what we've done to make sure they end up with a temporary resident visa. But there are going to be some cases in which it simply takes a lengthy period of time to complete the risk assessment.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm happy to have another time slot to ask more questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You have a whole seven minutes.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

That's even better. Thank you.

In my first round of questioning I was talking about information sharing, and we were able to determine that we do currently share amongst our...I believe you referenced them as security partners, so CIC, CBSA, and Public Safety. So we do have that capability. We do not necessarily have the same capabilities when we talk about CRA tax agencies, which I think is an issue that we need to look at.

I have another question. I didn't get a chance before, so I'm glad I have this chance now. It has to do with how the provincial and federal jurisdictions fall into place. With respect to provinces or territories, do we have any information-sharing agreements between federal and provincial agencies?

[Les Linklater]

We do, in fact. We have a rather systematic approach to the sharing of information—administrative data, largely, between CIC and provinces and territories, so admissions data, category by category, that sort of thing, gender, province of intended destination, etc. These are long-standing arrangements that we have to ensure that our provincial and territorial colleagues have access to data relevant to migration to their particular jurisdiction, and also on temporary foreign workers and international students.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I'm actually trying to determine whether we have any arrangements with provinces or territories with respect to provincial-territorial social service providers. I'm going to give you an example.

Obviously we've done a lot of bills within this committee. We've looked at a lot of initiatives to crack down on welfare fraud and so on. But we've heard from witnesses and there have been cases where someone has come to Canada and they've put an address on their application, and later on that application is denied for whatever reason. I'm not going to talk about a specific stream or anything else, but lo and behold, that person may or may not reside at that address. It may be a fictitious address. In fact, we may not even know if they're still in the country.

I come from Ontario. Scarborough Centre is my riding, and welfare is administered by the Ontario provincial government.

At the same time, this individual has applied for Ontario welfare, and the address they may have used on that application is not the same one they came to Canada with—at the federal level we know that from the application. So although they've been deemed to be illegal or inadmissible, or they've been asked to leave, they're still collecting welfare cheques somewhere. Whether or not they're still in the country—it's going somewhere, to a relative, a friend, an organized crime ring, or whatever the case is.

I guess my question is, do we have any information-sharing agreements with provinces or territories with respect to this specific area that I'm concerned about?

[Les Linklater]

The short answer is yes, we have the authority, and we actually have been sharing with Ontario a considerable amount of information around the status of claimants, largely spurred by the Ministry of Community and Social Services, in terms of querying CIC about the status of individuals who are applying for Ontario Works.

As we moved forward with Bill C-31, Protecting Canada's Immigration System Act, we have redoubled efforts initially with the Province of Ontario, given that about two-thirds of all refugee claimants in Canada are found in Ontario. We've been working with the province to ensure that our ability to share information between CBSA, the IRB, CIC, and the Ministry of Community and Social Services is as agile as it can be under our current legislative parameters. And we are working to have in place a more systematic approach to information sharing that would respect privacy rights and principles, but would get at this issue that has been raised around individuals who have received negative decisions or should have departed Canada, that they are no longer eligible to collect social assistance.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I just want to get comments as well from CBSA. I know you've appeared before us as witnesses, and I know you've stated a figure for how many people may or may not be in Canada—we don't know if they're still here; we can't track them down; we've asked them to leave; they haven't left; we don't know if they're here, etc. I'm just wondering if you could also answer that question with regard to how many people are out and about who we don't know about, who obviously we're very concerned about, but who may be involved in activities such as welfare fraud. Let's face it, this is welfare fraud.

[Peter Hill]

On the initiative that my colleague has just described with Ontario, the CBSA is a partner with CIC in that effort. So that is a priority for the agency as well. We have warrants for arrest for individuals who have absconded. In other words, they have not shown up for an immigration process.

There are currently about 43,000 or 44,000 warrants for individuals' arrests. By and large, 80% to 90% of those are failed refugee claimants without any criminality, without any security concerns. Nevertheless, they do represent a challenge for the CBSA that will partly be addressed through the implementation of entry/exit. We have done pilot projects in the past where we have confirmed that upwards of 20% or more of those individuals who have a warrant for their arrest have in fact left the country.

We're working very closely with the RCMP and our U.S. counterparts to deal with this particular challenge.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

May I ask a specific question?

With regard to sharing with the provinces, if you're looking for someone and the address we have at the federal level, through the immigration application process, is not a valid address—they're nowhere to be found—can you obtain the alternate address that they've used with regard to Ontario provincial welfare payments? Can we access that information to help you track down these individuals, or people and/or connections who may know where they might be? Do you have access to that information?

[Peter Hill]

I believe the current arrangement is a kind of case-by-case approach. We can obtain the information. We may not be able to obtain it as quickly as we would like if we had a systematic exchange. So we're working—

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

You see this as an area for improvement with respect to that?

[Peter Hill]

Yes.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Okay. Thank you very much.