Citizenship and Immigration Committee on July 24th, 2018

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

On that issue, given that there is a range of different possibilities that may be contributing to the housing crisis, why does there seem to be an obstacle vis-à-vis asylum seekers when it comes to reaching a common ground on making investments in housing between the federal and provincial governments in Ontario?

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

It's because family-sized housing is the hardest housing to build quickly, source quickly, and move people into. It's the most expensive form of housing, in particular in large urban areas. That's why the number of children in the emergency housing system, the shelter system, in Toronto is continuing to grow even though singles and subpopulations are starting to shrink. The challenge we have is housing children and families properly in this country.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Very quickly, just to conclude.... You mentioned the answer you got when you put the question to Stephen Harper and he said to read the Constitution.

In your view, why is it important that the federal government is contributing to investments in housing as part of the national housing strategy?

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

The history of this country is defined by progressive federal policy around housing. I make it a habit of collecting, when I'm out west in particular, the posters that show when families were seeking refuge from all parts of Europe over the last 100 years. The federal system would grant them land. The land had the sticks and stones and clay to build housing, settle, and start businesses. That's how the west was settled. It was a federal policy present across the globe, attracting Canadians from around the world. That's what has built this country.

Since Confederation, the federal government has had a stake in the federal housing policy. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation is called Canadian for a reason. There is a responsibility for federal governments to be engaged.

I agree with the member from B.C. The mistakes that were made in the early 1990s devastated people in this country and created the national housing crisis. The policies over the last 10 years made it worse. We stepped up with a significant 10-year plan that's already spending dollars. I can show the news releases from British Columbia—a very good, very aggressive government on housing. We are spending those dollars and solving those problems now.

The challenge we have is that the emergency shelter system in certain large cities is running at full capacity and as a result can't handle the surge. We have to address that. We have a responsibility.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you, Mr. Vaughan. We need to end there.

We're going to have a very brief suspension of the meeting so we can continue with our next guests. I ask members to take just two minutes as we get the teleconference and the new witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I'll reconvene the meeting, which continues with our study of the impact of the irregular crossings at Canada's southern border.

We welcome and thank our witnesses for attending.

I'm going to begin with Minister MacLeod for seven minutes, and then we'll go to Mr. Hope, the mayor of Chatham-Kent, on teleconference. Then we'll go to Mr. Fortin, and then Mr. Boldt.

Madam Minister, go ahead.

[Lisa MacLeod, Minister of Children, Community and Social Services and Minister Responsible for Women’s Issues, Government of Ontario]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I welcome this opportunity to appear before the committee. My name is Lisa MacLeod, and I am the minister responsible for immigration policy in the new Ontario government.

Our new government, like most or all Ontarians, recognizes the value and the importance of immigration to our economic prosperity. Ontario receives more immigrants than any other province in the country. We also receive more refugees than any other province. We are proud of our ability and capacity to welcome, settle, and integrate immigrants and refugees. Ontarians are generous in welcoming and supporting the settlement and integration of immigrants and refugees, and Ontarians know that immigration enhances all of our prosperity and brings investment and opportunity to our province.

Ontarians also want to know that there is integrity in the immigration and refugee system. Today, I'm appearing before this committee to highlight issues of systemic integrity that have arisen as a result of federal decisions.

Right now, Ontario is receiving an unprecedented number of illegal border crossers who, after crossing, are making a claim for refugee status using a loophole in the Canada-United States safe third country agreement to claim asylum. These crossings are an entirely different matter and are taking advantage of Ontarians' generosity. Our position on this issue has been crystal clear since the new government formed on June 29. Our new government believes that managing the influx of crossers is the federal government's responsibility. The federal government must also fund the services required to support them in full. Ontario can only do so much.

Since January 2016, we have received and welcomed more than 36,000 refugee claimants. In addition, more than 5,500 refugee claimants who made their claims in Quebec have reported moving to Ontario since January 2017. Now communities across our province are straining to support the high number of crossers.

In the city of Toronto, about 45% of shelter occupants are refugees. Our new government has stepped up to facilitate the use of approximately 800 spaces in college and university residences for shelter space during the summer. In addition, funds have been set aside for Red Cross support services in the college residential spaces that are being used as shelters.

After more than a year of consistent pressure on our shelter, welfare, and legal aid systems, the federal government announced that, at a future date, it will provide Ontario with $11 million. We estimate, however, that Ontario's cost to support these crossers is now approximately $200 million. That's $90 million in annualized welfare costs, $74 million in shelter costs for the City of Toronto by the year's end, $12 million and growing in shelter costs for the City of Ottawa, $3 million to the Red Cross to assist with temporary shelters, and $20 million in education costs for the children of these crossers. There has also been a strain on our legal aid system. In addition, the City of London is reporting strains within its shelter system. The problems seem to be spreading without any light at the end of the tunnel.

This crisis situation is aggravated by lengthy delays in the federal government's refugee determination system. Hearings that should be completed within 60 days are now taking approximately two years to be held, with no improvements in sight. This is two years of delays that leave families in limbo. Two years is far too long for people to await a decision. Two years is far too long for people in Ontario to be asked to support crossers whose claims may be denied two or three years from now. The federal government must regain control of the processing timetables, so that failed claimants leave more quickly and those accepted as refugees are able to move ahead and integrate into Ontario society. It is in everyone's interests to have refugee claims processed quickly and efficiently.

The federal government must also address border control and policy issues, including the gap in the Canada-United States safe third country agreement that contributes to the high number of irregular border crossers. In short, it is the federal government's responsibility to identify and fully fund a solution to the crisis caused by the handling of the crossers. That includes working with the City of Toronto, the City of Ottawa, and other affected municipalities to address the housing situation by providing full funding to the municipal shelter system and identifying federal facilities that can be used to house individuals and families currently staying in college dorms, who will be homeless after August 9, when they are expected to move out.

Ontario also expects the federal government to address the costs associated with crossers' access to our welfare and legal aid systems, as well as our education system. Ontario is looking to the federal government to uphold its responsibility to actively manage the influx of border crossers and provide full financial support to cover the costs incurred.

Ontarians are pro-immigration, but the current crisis has tested their patience. I say this to the federal government: Take responsibility for your choices; stand behind them and fully fund them, rather than passing the cost on to hard-pressed Ontario municipalities.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you very much.

We're going to continue now with the mayor of Chatham-Kent, Mr. Hope.

Thank you, Your Worship, for joining us.

[Randy Hope, Mayor, Municipality of Chatham-Kent]

Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak before the committee today.

First of all, I want to put it in perspective, because some may not know where Chatham-Kent actually is. We're in the most southern part of Canada, in Ontario. The important part is that the community of Chatham-Kent is 2,400 square kilometres. Most of that is prime agricultural land, and advanced manufacturing is one of the key areas.

I appreciate the opportunity today, because welcoming newcomers to Chatham-Kent is nothing that we haven't heard of before—whether it be the underground railroad system, with Uncle Tom's Cabin, located in the community of Dresden; the immigrants who came from Europe to our community in the 20th century; or the refugees who located themselves in our community after the Second World War.

Chatham-Kent was also named one of the first welcoming communities in Canada for the Syrian refugees in 2016. Today, we have 75 Syrian refugees who have located in our community and are now productive members of our society. The census showed us that between 2011 and 2016 our population had declined. I don't think we're any different from any other rural community in Ontario. We see people transferring themselves to large urban centres, and smaller communities are faced with school closures, decreasing population, and less of an assessment. In Chatham-Kent, we have 43 people per square kilometre, and the basic assessment that we get supports the infrastructure that we have in our community.

The minister talked about a number of things. I compliment the minister for her remarks about making sure that there is financial responsibility, and that the federal government is working on those issues and is there to support communities such as ours and make sure they have the financial resources.

The refugees are significantly important. When I look at refugees, whether Syrians or those in the current situation.... I had the pleasure of talking with John Tory, the mayor of Toronto, about how we can help. We're talking about people here. A lot of our communities still need a labour force. That is going to be required. It's important that we identify the skills that the individuals may have because they can be major assets to our communities. A lot of our employers are looking for certain skill sets. For instance, in the community of Tilbury we had a job fair looking to fill over 200 vacant positions that required people for employment opportunities. We need to understand this refugee crisis that people are talking about. Most importantly, do these individuals have skill sets that can be transferred into full-time employment opportunities? If they like being here, maybe they will take up continuous residence with our community.

We've done a lot of work in our community. We want to make sure that those who come to Chatham-Kent have the support services that are here. We have received government funding to make sure that certain programs are available, and to make sure that translation, English as a second language, and a number of other things are there to support them. We also support our community college and our elementary school system to deal with foreign students coming to our community. We have schools that are being designated for closure because of the decrease of the student population in our communities.

We see this as an opportunity for our community members to rally behind each other and support each other to make sure that we're bringing people in and giving them gainful employment opportunities, deploying them into a community that is safe, and, most importantly, making sure they feel welcome in the community they are coming to.

Do we believe that the federal government has a responsibility? You are the gatekeeper, whether it's about refugees and asylum seekers, or whether it's about the provincial nominee program. I truly believe that more points need to be given to rural communities across Ontario—and I'm going to speak only about Ontario and not the rest of Canada. Point systems need to be such that investments are made in rural communities. The infrastructure is already there and it is sustainable to take more people people on. This will increase our tax base as they become productive members, buying homes and living in apartments, or whatever it may be, and we need to make sure that people feel safe.

The key point that I'm trying to get across to the committee.... I look forward to the questions. I listened to a little bit before. We could all point fingers as to who failed what on social housing. I, too, have a social housing waiting list, but emergency shelters should follow the true definition of emergency shelters: no more than that. We should make sure that we have affordable housing available for people. We need to make sure that the jobs they are seeking are long-term gainful employment opportunities and that they have the opportunity to build a life.

The minister was absolutely right. Two years is a long wait for anybody to go through any process, whether it be in a provincial nominee program or as a refugee or an asylum seeker. Two years is a long time. If we want them to buy a home, to settle their roots, and to make sure their children are placed in proper schooling systems, then we need to make sure that due diligence is properly done so that the residents get the timely fashion they need in order to become part of Canadian society.

I know that in Chatham-Kent they'd be welcome. I know that the employers in my community would welcome them, because we believe that in Chatham-Kent there is a huge opportunity for them to be a part of our contributing society, to be a part of the community called Chatham-Kent. We want to make sure that they can be spokespeople for newcomers who are maybe looking at Canada as an opportunity and looking at Ontario as a place where they want to work, live, and invest, spokespeople who would say, “You ought to seek out Chatham-Kent because it is a great place to work, live, and play.”

I'll stop here. I think what's really important is to work with the committee, because we are talking about humans here. We are talking about human beings with children, and we want to make sure that we as government.... It doesn't matter whether we are the federal, provincial, or municipal government. We as government need to put our best foot forward to make sure that we treat people with the most humane dignity that they deserve, but most importantly to work with them so they can become contributing members of society who, I believe, will shape this country to be even better. We were never afraid of welcoming people, and we need to continue to do that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you.

We will now move on to Mr. Fortin, national president of the Customs and Immigration Union.

[Jean-Pierre Fortin, National President, Customs and Immigration Union]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the standing committee.

My name is Jean-Pierre Fortin, and I am the national president of the Customs and Immigration Union. Our union has 10,000 members and represents Canada's front-line customs and immigration officers; investigations, intelligence, and trade customs officers; immigration, inland enforcement, and hearing officers; as well as support staff who work at the Canada Border Services Agency. I am an officer myself, with over 18 years of experience on the front line. Over the years, I have seen the government's organizational structure and our workers' jobs evolve.

The CIU has a long history of involvement in border security and immigration enforcement issues on behalf of its members. We seek to offer members operational insight to identify areas of concern and, where possible, to improve them.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as your committee reviews the impact of irregular crossing of Canada's southern border. The issue is of great importance, and it needs an informed review.

In recent years, the greatest number of irregular crossings have taken place between the state of New York and Lacolle, Quebec. I was in Lacolle yesterday meeting with members, who shared their observations and recommendations with me. I can confirm that the situation in Quebec is having an impact across Canada, as front-line CBSA officers are reassigned from their existing positions in land ports and airports to deal with people entering Canada between ports of entry.

CBSA created a pool of volunteer officers who are prepared to deploy to Lacolle when needed. Yesterday, there were six or seven officers from other provinces who were providing assistance. If that number climbs, as we expect it will, there will be a negative impact, as it is creating pressure on the work locations they leave. This, in turn, may cause delays in crossing the border at the work locations they left behind.

This staffing situation is made worse by the fact that there is already a severe shortage of approximately 1,100 front-line officers. The shortage is a result of the former government's 2011 deficit reduction action plan, which was intended to cut unproductive administrative and supervisory positions through attrition while maintaining operational capacities. Unfortunately, the CBSA cuts included front-line personnel at primary, secondary, export clearance, domestic intelligence, foreign intelligence, screening, and immigration enforcement. The situation continues to worsen, as CBSA's attrition rate is higher than the rate at which it is hiring.

Pursuant to both the Customs Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, it is illegal for a person to enter Canada between designated ports of entry. However, those same persons do have the legal right to make a refugee claim once they have entered the country.

Since January 2018, the number of asylum seekers has averaged around 30 or 40 per day. Exceptionally, on some days that number would reach 80. That is the number our officers were expected to clear yesterday at Lacolle. Beginning on the Easter long weekend, which was from March 30 to April 2, the numbers climbed to 150 or 160 per day, and the numbers remained higher than usual—between 100 and 160—until early May.

In early 2018, we observed that a large number of those entering Canada illegally or irregularly were not persons whose temporary protection status in the U.S. was facing revocation. Rather, they were mainly from Nigeria, having lawfully entered the U.S.A. through a visa for the express purpose of entering Canada between ports of entry.

For the last two months, the numbers have stabilized at approximately 40 per day. We believe the drop is likely due to the Canadian government's intervention. The U.S. is no longer issuing visas to Nigerian nationals who merely wish to transit through the U.S. in order to enter Canada.

It is important that appropriate screening take place wherever visas are issued, and I would urge the committee to confirm with the government that appropriate steps have been taken in that regard. While the Nigerian phenomenon was unexpected, as these asylum seekers are not facing revocation of TPS in the U.S., there are now well over 200,000 individuals who do have TPS and who are expected to be required to leave the U.S. in 2019.

As stated earlier, those crossing the border between ports of entry have legal rights to make refugee claims once they have entered the country. If the interviewing officer concludes that the person making a refugee claim is inadmissible, the process is suspended until that issue is resolved. Although we welcome asylum seekers to our country, we also need to ensure that this is not being done to the detriment of security.

Last month, CBSA issued an operational bulletin directing all front-line officers, including those dealing with the situation in Quebec, to restrict their querying of the U.S. National Crime Information Center database, which is equivalent to our Canadian Police Information Centre database. CBSA informed us that the directive came from the United States. I can tell you that this directive raised significant concerns from our members. They reiterated their concerns to me yesterday when I was in Lacolle, and I would recommend that the committee seek an explanation of this directive issuance from the CBSA president.

The CIU has always asked that all officers' mobility be increased so that they are able to monitor activity in between ports of entry. This can be done in partnership with the RCMP.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I just need to ask you to draw to a close.

[Jean-Pierre Fortin]

The government has just appointed a new Minister of Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction. While the exact mandate is unclear, jointly improving our mobility enforcement capacity between ports of entry should be a priority.

I want to thank the committee for having me here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Boldt, you have seven minutes.

[Randy Boldt, As an Individual]

Thank you very much for inviting me.

I'll briefly give you a bit of my background. Before I got involved in immigration, I was a commercial banker in Canada and the United Kingdom. I began my involvement with immigration as the manager and founder of the provincial nominee program in Manitoba for the business side. I later became assistant deputy minister of immigration in Saskatchewan. I started my own immigration company in 2008. I would also like to say that my family came as refugees in 1929, escaping the Soviet Union.

As the levels of asylum seekers grow, both from those who cross the border irregularly and those who apply when they come as visitors and students, the visa officers, as Mr. Fortin was talking about, have ordinary human reactions. They increase refusal rates for all other categories that are coming in temporarily. This is very important for people to understand. Officers are the gatekeepers to Canada, and they see their job as protecting our country from those wanting to enter and make asylum claims. They believe there are good processes for applying as refugees abroad, and coming to Canada as visitors and walking across a non-controlled border crossing are not some of them. If an officer believes that an applicant for a temporary visa has even the slightest intention of applying for asylum, they will be refused a visitor visa or a student visa or a work permit. I work with many visa posts around the world, and officers have made this point abundantly clear to me.

Also, the greater the number of asylum seekers being approved in Canada, the greater the number of refusals will be for temporary visas outside of Canada—students, visitors, and workers. According to the minister's own report, those coming as international students and visitors contributed $32 billion annually to the Canadian economy in 2017, so any increase in refusal rates costs our country billions of dollars a year.

The number of student visa refusals has skyrocketed under the current federal government. In fact, in most provinces it has nearly doubled. The refusal rates have gone from mid-20% three years ago to over 50% in the last three years. Our local Manitoba association wrote to the minister about this. Minister Hussen's response was completely illogical. He simply took down the statistics from the website and refused to provide any statistics via ATIP. This is at the same time that Manitoba and most other provinces are looking at international students as a growing source of skilled labour to fill economic needs.

It has recently been well documented that visitor visa refusals have also risen dramatically. The official rate is now 26%, but this number vastly underestimates this issue. By the way, I also sit on the board of one of the largest Indian travel agencies. As their Canadian director, I can talk with some assurance about this. In places like India, getting a U.S. visa is relatively simple. Conversely, people know that the majority of Indians can't get a visitor visa to Canada, so they simply do not apply. There are millions more visitors who would like to come to Canada but who know that their visas will be refused, so they don't try. The reason they will be refused is that the officers fear they will make an asylum claim.

When we started the provincial nominee program in 1997, the processing time for many years was about six months. Over the next 18 years, it slowly grew to about 11 months. That's the federal processing time. Since the new government has taken over, the processing time has quickly escalated to 19 months. In a province like Manitoba, which relies almost entirely on the provincial nominee program for increases in skilled labour and population growth, this increase in processing time costs our little province tens of millions of dollars a year.

Finally, there is the cost of processing and settling those who make asylum claims in Canada. In my view, this is likely the smallest cost associated with this issue. The other costs—missed opportunities of students and visitors, and companies and communities being without skilled workers—are far larger and more critical. Parliament has asked the Parliamentary Budget Officer to examine the costs associated with asylum seekers. I would like to ask this committee to change and amend that request so that the costs associated with refused visitors, refused students, and delays with economic immigrants be added to the costs associated with these claims.

There is only one department of IRCC, not two. The department allocates resources as they see fit. In 2017 it allocated resources to process Syrian refugees' security screening in 96 hours, down from 30 days. This is at the same time it's taken up to 11 years—a stunning number—to screen some family members who were sponsored by their children. These are resource allocations made by the government. There are no two departments. They keep repeating that there are two streams, but as one stream goes faster, the other stream goes slower. This is irrefutable.

It is also irrefutable that as asylum seeker approval numbers grow, the refusal of other temporary categories goes up substantially.

The approval rate of asylum seekers in the United States under the Obama administration was 18%. In the U.K. it is 28%. In France it is 32%. In Canada, under this government, it is now 70% and rising, but even this rate is dramatically understated.

The 30% who are refused have several ways of remaining. Of course, they can appeal, but contrary to what Mr. Vaughan said, the vast majority of those crossing irregularly are single men. Many refused applicants simply get married and remain as spouses, while others are unable to be removed due to a lack of travel documents or pre-removal risk assessment. There are also humanitarian and compassionate grounds, and some even qualify as federal skilled workers.

To the best of my knowledge, there have never been any statistics released on the actual number of asylum seekers who are allowed to remain in Canada. Anecdotally, visa officers claim that about half of those who are initially refused are allowed to stay for various reasons, for a total of 85% approval. I am not aware of any other developed country that allows 85% of asylum seekers to remain.

In Canada, regardless of which party you are in or support, we passionately believe in fairness. All of us do; no party has a lock on it. Yet when it comes to asylum seekers, it is hyperbole, political correctness, and lack of any economic data or analysis that seem to rule.

There should be one door to enter Canada, and that is the front door.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you to all the witnesses.

Mr. Fragiskatos, you have seven minutes.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses.

Minister, you mentioned a number of estimates on costs at the beginning. I wonder if you could table that for the committee, along with an explanation of how those figures were worked out.

[Lisa MacLeod]

Thanks very much for your question. Yes, we'll do that for you.

Also, I just want to thank you for holding these hearings. I think it was very enlightening for me.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

[Lisa MacLeod]

We're going to be sending a letter to—

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

It's appreciated.

[Lisa MacLeod]

—my four or five ministerial counterparts in your government—

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

I don't mean to cut you off, Minister, but I do have limited time, so I want to get into the questions.

The first is on legal issues. You continue to insist, and we heard today that you're using the word “illegal” when describing the situation. Can you tell me where in the Canadian Criminal Code it says that crossing the border to seek asylum is illegal?

We did hear the nuance about the Customs Act, but that still recognizes the legal rights of asylum seekers.

[Lisa MacLeod]

We're using a term that was used by the federal Minister of Immigration at one point in time.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Excuse me...?