Thank you kindly, Mr. Chair.
Honourable members, thank you. I am delighted to be here. This is my first time appearing before a committee. Since I don't have a lot of time, I will speak directly to the issue.
I am from Montreal and I represent the Table de concertation des organismes au service des personnes réfugiées et immigrantes as well as the Réseau d'action pour l'égalité des femmes immigrées et racisées du Québec. Professionally, I teach the sociology of immigration at UQAM, so I'm a sociologist by trade.
I'd like to discuss two things today. The first has to do with the status of being an immigrant and the consequences of some precarious status-related issues on the living conditions of immigrant women. The second issue is also tied to status and concerns the economic uncertainty of immigrant and racialized women.
I will now discuss the first issue, the consequences of immigrant status, more specifically as they relate to sponsorship.
Before I begin, I should tell you that I also work on the front lines, and we are in contact with immigrant women. My remarks today are based on the experiences of women on the ground and on findings that have allowed us to give immigrant women a voice. This is the reality on the ground.
In October 2012, the federal government announced the introduction of a two-year conditional permanent residence period for certain sponsored spouses. Following that announcement, we realized that, as a result of the new immigration rule, the sponsored spouses in question could face deportation if they did not live with their spouse for the full two years of the conditional permanent residence period.
In the view of the Table de concertation des organismes au service des personnes réfugiées et immigrantes and Réseau d'action pour l'égalité des femmes immigrées et racisées du Québec, implementing a conditional permanent residence period is a step backward in Canada's immigration policy. It exacerbates inequalities in marriage relationships and makes women, in particular, more vulnerable to violence, despite the exception for spouses who are victims of abuse.
The new measure diminishes women's safety and, above all, significantly empowers the guarantor. The guarantor would have the ability to pressure the woman into doing whatever he wants, by threatening the sponsored spouse with the possibility of losing her permanent residence status at any time.
It is our view that this new rule also represents a step backward for all Canadian women and immigrant women, who are already overrepresented in the most vulnerable immigrant groups. The new sexist measures are a direct attack on them.
Although an exception was set out for spouses suffering abuse or neglect, we believe that women cannot benefit from it. Many of them are not familiar enough with Canada's laws or, specifically, the exception tied to the conditional two-year period. It is our opinion that sponsored spouses suffering from abuse, especially women, will not be able to benefit from the exception owing to a number of barriers such as the lack of access to information, the inability to speak the language and social isolation.
A number of cultural factors come into play as well. Speaking out against domestic abuse is frowned upon in certain cultures. Something of a code of silence exists and it forces women to keep quiet, out of fear that they will be shunned or rejected by their family, among other things.
For example, an arranged marriage is a situation where a woman cannot speak up about domestic abuse. If she does, she runs the risk of facing some rather negative consequences. Last year, for that matter, we observed situations involving honour crimes and the like. A forced marriage is another example of a vulnerable situation for women.
Women do not report abuse for many reasons. It is also important that immigrant women have the right understanding and definition of abuse. Some equate abuse with physical violence, even though we all know abuse comes in many forms, physical, psychological, economic and so forth.
That is why we believe there are other ways to deter people from committing marriage fraud, one of the objectives underlying the new measures. Steps could be taken to verify the legitimacy of a marriage or union in the home country. Different approaches could be used to verify that.
Furthermore, it is no longer good enough to judge the guarantor by the information they, themselves, supply. It is necessary to meet with them and look them in the eye. That is the person who will be sponsoring the woman. Making a determination on the sponsor should not be limited to reviewing the information in their file.
A great deal of immigrant women don't know the laws or even what it means to be sponsored. They should perhaps be advised in their home countries of the various issues related to being an immigrant and, especially, the sponsorship mechanism. In some countries, Canadian embassies frequently offer information sessions on Canada and Quebec to successful immigration applicants. It would be very beneficial to organize similar information sessions on Canada's immigration laws.