Citizenship and Immigration Committee on March 25th, 2014

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

I agree completely with the importance of learning one of the two official languages, but I consider that it is not a good idea to impose that as an entry condition.

The second question is about this new system since November 2012, I think, where the couple is forced to live together for two years to become a spouse allowed into the country. We had some discussion in the last session. One person at least argued that this did not do anything to reduce the risk of violence and was not a good idea.

I'd like to ask each of the three of you, is this new system where the couple is forced to live together for two years as a condition of entry a good thing? Is it helpful to the cause against violence against women, or is it not a good thing?

[Claudia Andrea Molina]

I think it's a really bad thing. I think it puts spouses on an unequal basis. I think it's very unhealthy in a relationship. It's very arbitrary that in two years we'll know for sure that this is not a bad-faith marriage or relationship. Often in real life, couples will fight at the beginning of a relationship, especially after having children, and especially for someone who comes into a new country who has to adapt. I think it's not connected to reality.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you. I don't want to rush you. I just want to make sure the other two get to answer.

[Saman Ahsan]

I agree with that, and add that such a condition would not prevent violence.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Ms. Duplessis, what is your opinion?

[Marie-Josée Duplessis]

I think that in cases where there may be violence and mistreatment, the imposition of these two years as an entry condition will keep certain women in intolerable situations, perhaps precisely because they will be afraid of not being accepted into the country. I think that in a precarious situation where there could be violence, this can only limit women's possible recourses.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

So the three of you are opposed to such rules. Am I right?

[Marie-Josée Duplessis]

Yes. I am not in favour of such a rule.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you.

On the basis of our two sessions, we have unanimity on both of those points, so our report can be considered written.

In my remaining time, I'd like to ask about another more positive suggestion that was made, and I thought it was a really good idea.

A lot of the problem with abused mothers is that if they get out of the relationship, they could be deported unless they appeal to stay. That appeal process could take one year, two years, even more, and in the meantime they're in a very precarious position. Would it not be a practical solution to this kind of issue to speed up this process so the women involved would have a decision much faster as to whether or not they could stay in this country with their children?

[Saman Ahsan]

Definitely, I would agree with that.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Good. I don't want to show a bias in what answers I favour, but that's a good answer.

[Claudia Andrea Molina]

I think that article 4(f) of the UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women shed some light on the question you just asked. I think it says, and this is what's happening here, the government needs to be careful when they pass laws that they don't increase violence toward women, when the objective is to reduce it. I think this is what we're creating here.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

It's sometimes called the law of unintended consequences.

[Claudia Andrea Molina]

Yes, unintended consequences.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Your time has expired, Mr. McCallum. Thank you.

Mr. Opitz.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and through you, thank you to all the witnesses for being here. They were very good presentations

Just to start my bit, it reminds me of something that the Blessed John Paul once said, that it's the duty of every man to uphold the dignity of every woman. That's something I think we can all take away.

I'll start with you, Ms. Ahsan. This was asked in the last panel, but I'd like your opinion on it.

On March 4 Chantal Desloges mentioned that she believed the minimum age of those being sponsored should be raised from 16 to 18. Would you agree with that?

[Saman Ahsan]

I would strongly agree to that.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Could you elaborate?

[Saman Ahsan]

I think that 16 is too young an age to get married in any case, and it's a young age for sponsorship. I think universally, across the world, 16 should be too young to get married.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

I liked your presentation, by the way. I think you showed some good leadership in developing young people and girls and giving them opportunities. That's something that I enjoy doing with kids in my riding, being a former trainer in the military. It's part and parcel of what I have done in the past.

How many immigrant communities do you work with?

[Saman Ahsan]

We don't have a number, but I said that we have a network of about 340 member groups that work across Canada. About two-thirds of them are working with immigrant or racialized communities.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Okay.

What cases of forced marriage have you seen?

[Saman Ahsan]

We haven't really seen any cases of forced marriage in my work with Girls Action Foundation. We do see girls who mention in the programs that their parents are the ones who would find a spouse for them from their country of origin. We do have such things, but there hasn't been any case that I have seen directly. In such cases when we hear of girls, our job is really to build their critical thinking and their communication skills so they can express themselves and speak to their parents. We link them up with supports that are available in their community, services, community members, role models to whom they can go when they face such situations.

We're not like a social worker who would actually intervene in those cases; we're more on the prevention side.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Would you consider any of those arranged marriages as being forced?

[Saman Ahsan]

I think there's a—