Citizenship and Immigration Committee on July 24th, 2018

[John Ossowski]

—the Americans were concerned that they didn't have eyes on this individual, and they weren't sure where they truly came from. So that is what is—

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I need to end it there.

Ms. Mendès, you have about five and a half to six minutes.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and welcome to all.

Congratulations, Minister Blair.

I am more confused now by your answer than I was previously, but I won't go there.

I'll go back to the question of the 9,000-kilometre border. I speed all the time on the highway—all the time, I swear to you—and I haven't gotten a single ticket. I don't get tickets. So, I'm sorry, I could claim my asylum anywhere and not get caught. It's just so unbelievably ridiculous to claim that we could monitor 9,000 kilometres of a border. It's beyond ridiculous. I'm sorry; I've had my rant.

Going back to that crossing into the United States and reciprocity or not, could you be a little more precise? My understanding of the safe third country agreement is that if you cross the border in-between official ports of entry, you are not returned back to the third country. But if you cross at a port of entry, an official one, then you go back or are sent back.

You're saying that's not exactly the case for the Americans?

[John Ossowski]

Just to be clear, when you show up at a regular port of entry—

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Such as Lacolle, which is the one closest to me.

[John Ossowski]

—or a bridge, say, in southern Ontario, and you seek asylum, one of four conditions must be met as an exception to the safe third country agreement—i.e., you have an anchor relative in Canada, or you're an unaccompanied minor.... That is very clear what happens.

In-between ports of entry, there is an exception, if you will, or a “loophole”, for lack of a better word, in the agreement where during the negotiations the Americans said that we don't know for sure where these people claimed, because they could claim inland or they could claim in-between port of entry. They wanted to know where they originally came from, and that is what is currently being exploited by these people crossing in-between ports of entry.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Okay, but what my colleagues on the other side were claiming was that the Americans are not doing it the same way we are.

[John Ossowski]

If somebody went into the United States and claimed asylum—

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

—from Canada to the United States—

[John Ossowski]

—and it was part of the safe third country agreement the way it's currently written, they would apply it, but they would have to be seeking protection. They would have to be claiming asylum.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Well, yes, but the point that Mr. Poilievre was making is that the Americans will send them back to Canada because they consider that even if they cross in-between legal or formal ports of entry, the agreement would still apply. Is that what you're saying? If I understood correctly what Mr. Poilievre was saying, the Americans are applying it even in-between official ports of entry.

Is that what you asked, Mr. Poilievre?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

I'm sorry, I don't know what you're asking me.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

I'm trying to clarify that, because apparently that's what you are claiming, that the Americans do not apply the safe third country agreement the same way we do.

[John Ossowski]

The agreement is fully reciprocal the way I understand it, and I'd be happy to go back and find some data to see what happens to people who cross from Canada into the United States, if that would help the committee during their study.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Now, going to a more positive one, could both ministers enlarge a little more the national strategic response plan for the asylum seekers “challenge” we are facing, as you put it, Minister? That is definitely a result of what's been happening in the United States. We know that is why we've been having this surge, if you will, of people crossing our borders. We do know there is a national strategic plan. Could you just elaborate a bit on what is being put in place and look at the provinces, the municipalities, and the stakeholders that are all involved in this issue if you can? Thank you.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

I'll turn to Bill to respond to part of that, but let me just deal with the question here about when this issue started. If you actually trace back the migration patterns of when people started to move toward the Canadian border, it in fact predates the last election in the United States. The beginnings of that movement were before the government changed in the U.S.

Therefore, I don't think you can say entirely that what is happening is a phenomenon triggered by political developments in the U.S., because the origins of this began before that.

Our agencies, all of them at this table, coordinated by the government operations centre, learned many best practices and many practical lessons from the experience of last year and applied those lessons to our planning process for this year and for future years, as necessary. We've engaged multiple departments of the Government of Canada, together with provinces and municipalities, as well as NGOs. A number of NGOs are engaged in this, like the Red Cross, for example, to make sure that we have the provisions in place and the flexibilities to deal with the eventualities as they present themselves. We may need to increase; we may need to decrease.

As we saw earlier this year, there was a trend upward in the numbers until about Easter. There was a spike in the numbers around Easter, and ever since then the numbers have actually been going down to the point right now that they're at the lowest level they've been all year.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I need to end it there. I'm sorry.

We started at 10:04 and so we have about one or two minutes to split the difference between the two panels.

Would the Conservatives like another one or two minutes?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Minister Blair, what is the total cost of providing language training services for people coming into Canada via this cohort that we're discussing today?

[Bill Blair]

I don't have that information. I'll turn to officials.

[Mike MacDonald]

There are no language services being provided at the federal level among the settlement funding for those who are not yet permanent residents. Any type of social services of this nature would be provincial or municipal, should they exist.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

How many will be required to have language training services?

[Mike MacDonald]

We do not know that at this time.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

How many people, who have been part of this cohort since January 2017 have found employment?

[Mike MacDonald]

I have the work permit uptake issuance, which has been extremely high for both Nigerians and Haitians.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

How many have actually found employment?