Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Nov. 26th, 2018

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

I'm sorry, but that's not what I'm asking. It is a program specifically within Canada to look at public perception or to change public perception. There was a whole CBC article on it. I'm just wondering if the government has given you direction to prepare a framework on that particular initiative.

[Glen Linder]

One initiative—and I think this is perhaps the one to which you're referring—is that we have been looking at making sure that we make data available to demonstrate the impacts of immigration on Canada, the economic and social benefits in terms of why immigration matters to Canada. There might be some specific—

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

But—just with the time I have left—has the government given you a framework on how to translate that data into, perhaps, advertising, or with regard to the media?

[Glen Linder]

I don't personally have that information on me today, so I'm sorry, but I can't answer that question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I'm afraid that I need to end that there.

Welcome, Mr. Stetski. If I have unanimous consent from the committee, I can give you a little bit of time to settle in if you would like it. If I have unanimous consent, we would switch to a Liberal questioner and then to you.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Mr. Whalen, you're next.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you very much.

Mr. DeCourcey, with respect to the various agreements, compacts, treaties and whatnot that Canada may or may not be able to enter into, is there anything in the global compacts on migration and refugees that would either prevent Canada from negotiating agreements like the safe third country agreement, or encourage Canada in its ability to negotiate bilateral arrangements with countries for the safe return of migrants from those countries who were denied asylum, for instance?

[Matt DeCourcey]

Actually, the compact speaks explicitly—in a proposed action item—about the idea that countries should enter into multilateral, regional or bilateral agreements to manage migration issues.

In objective 23, which speaks to strengthening international co-operation and global partnerships for safe, orderly and regular migration, there is reference to this in paragraph (e) under the action items. It says, “Conclude bilateral, regional or multilateral mutually beneficial, tailored and transparent partnerships, in line with international law, that develop targeted solutions to migration...”

It doesn't say it explicitly, but that's exactly what we're talking about when we're talking about a negotiated safe third country agreement between Canada and the United States.

If you are in favour of a safe third country agreement between our two countries, then you are likely in favour of a compact that endorses not just Canada and the U.S. negotiating that sort of agreement and ensuring that it meets the needs of both countries, but other countries around the world negotiating perhaps similar agreements, or agreements that would be in the best interests of two countries, or a grouping of countries in different regions dealing with their own unique migration challenges.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

On that line, if the compacts represent a compendium, or they provide some type of framework where countries can agree that these are the challenges, the common definitions and the best practices.... If the United States isn't part of the compact, is there any concern, when negotiating these issues with them, that they are going to take a vastly different view on what the challenges are and how they are meant to be dealt with? Or, is it the experience of the department that it really is consistent with the United States that the U.S. not being part of it doesn't have to do with their common understanding of the problem?

[Matt DeCourcey]

I will speak for the Government of Canada. Our view is that the compact is consistent with the values we want to share with the world. It's consistent with an agreement like the safe third country agreement we have with the United States.

I know that within his mandate, the Minister of Border Security has undertaken to initiate conversations with his counterparts in the U.S. to modernize that agreement. We would see that as well within the scope of what is promoted within the compact for safe, orderly and regular migration.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

On that note—that it does represent Canadian values when it comes to migration—those values should be informed in some part by Canadians.

Some concern has been expressed at this committee that Canadians weren't involved in the development of the response. We've heard some testimony that, in fact, Canada was one of the lead players at the table to ensure....

Could you inform the committee to what extent Canadians were consulted on the positions that were taken in the negotiation of the global compact? If it predates your time, then I'm happy to hear from the other witnesses as well.

[Matt DeCourcey]

Sure, absolutely.

It was tremendously important for our government that Canadian values, values based on equality, human dignity, human rights and understanding of the vulnerabilities that different populations, including women and girls, face when they are in migration or refugee situations, were all included in the final draft of the compact. That was to ensure that we had the best understanding of what Canada wanted to offer to these compacts from the moment that the declaration in New York was signed in 2016. We undertook extensive consultations. We consulted with a range of migration experts across the country, with academics, with NGOs.

We also consulted extensively with the provinces and territories. Each provincial government was asked to provide feedback on their thoughts of what was contained within the compact. A number of those provinces provided feedback. Some of them didn't. Those that did provide feedback expressed no concerns with our signing of the compact and we took silence by the others to mean that they were comfortable with Canada signing on to the compact.

We're comfortable that through those consultations we were able to reflect Canadian values broadly and comprehensively, and ensure that the compact doesn't set a global standard for itself that Canada needs to find for itself, but that it demonstrates the standard that Canada has set for the world and will allow us to work with other countries to bring them up to the standard we've set.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

On that note, this intensive set of meetings was a request by the official opposition in a motion to the committee to focus on the global compact. To this extent, I'm quite satisfied that our interest is protected and that we're part of them.

Were Canada to withdraw from the global compact, what would be the consequence of Canada maintaining a leadership position in this field but also in keeping other countries that are part of the compact adhering to its values?

[Matt DeCourcey]

I think everybody at this table would or should agree that Canada cannot on its own, nor can any country on its own, address the significant challenges out there as they relate to global migration trends.

It's important that Canada have a seat at the table, that we work not only to share our best practices and learn from the best practices of others as they relate to the ways that we resettle and provide integration and settlement supports to refugees, but also that we better understand the situation that host countries face in some of the least developed countries of the world, that we understand how better to provide humanitarian supports and development assistance, that we continue to work with other countries on diplomatic efforts and other efforts of international co-operation, to make sure that basic needs are met and that human rights are always upheld.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you. We need to end there.

Mr. Stetski.

[Wayne Stetski, NDP, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Thank you.

My apology if you've already been asked this question.

I want to start with a larger question because there's been a lot of controversy lately.

Does the United States still meet the formal definition of a safe country for refugees?

[Matt DeCourcey]

Our officials have been satisfied that it still meets the safe third country definition that was part of the original signing.

I can assure you that it's part of the responsibility of government to constantly be reviewing our international agreements to make sure that countries we're in agreements with are still maintaining the responsibilities they have in signing them. We continue to do that.

[Wayne Stetski, NDP, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

What would it take for Canada to decide that they didn't meet the definition?

[Matt DeCourcey]

I'd be happy to allow one of my colleagues here to speak to the technical aspects of the safe third country agreement if they were able to do so, but again, from the Government of Canada's perspective we continue to monitor the situation in the United States. As you well know, we have a number of ongoing conversations with our U.S. colleagues across a whole range of issues, and certainly managing migration is one of them.

[Susan Greene]

Further to the question on the safe third country agreement as we explained earlier, there are criteria that we look to as part of the review process. The department and the government are doing this on a regular basis, so we're very aware of the situation in the United States and monitoring it carefully.

Specifically at this point, I couldn't speak to what exactly it would take to change the assessment.

[Wayne Stetski, NDP, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Okay.

A number of communities in my riding are privately sponsoring refugees, and they're happy to do so, and potentially quite frustrated, I guess, by limitations on private refugees. I'm interested in whether annual immigration levels plans will change with the global compact on refugees. Also, why does there continue to be a cap on privately sponsored refugee streams when we have people who really would encourage more private refugees, in Kootenay—Columbia, my part of the world, anyway?

[Matt DeCourcey]

Thanks for raising our privately sponsored refugee program. It's unique around the world. It's a global best practice. Wayne, in your riding, in Kootenay—Columbia, it's similar to where I come from in Fredericton, where groups are always eager to support vulnerable people around the world through that program. Through the tabling of our levels plan, we continue to raise the number of privately sponsored refugees who will be admitted to Canada. I believe we've tripled the number of privately sponsored refugees from what it was before 2015. We know that's because of the charity and desire of Canadians to play a role in this effort.

Through our signing on to this compact, we've had a positive leadership role in seeing now five other countries around the world adopt, with certain specifics tailored to their country's unique needs, their own sponsorship programs whereby private citizens are now starting to support the resettlement and integration of refugees.

We know that this program is important. We are trying to meet the demands of Canadians. Certainly, the fact that we have a well-managed and quite robust migration system that allows us to forecast who we will admit to this country on a one-, two- or three-year basis is itself a global best practice and something that we'll continue to share with the global community through our work on these compacts and in other discussion forums that we entertain around the world.

[Wayne Stetski, NDP, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Will the cap be increased, then?

[Matt DeCourcey]

Our levels plan has been set now for the next three years, which already has seen a significant increase in the number of privately sponsored refugees who will land in Canada, year over year.

I would suggest that we are a global leader when it comes to refugee resettlement. In fact, we in Canada are on track to resettle more refugees than any other country in the world in 2018. We have to do that in a well-managed and orderly way, taking a number of things into consideration, including government resources available and the capacity of refugees to safely and securely settle in communities and start contributing themselves to those local communities. Those are analyses and assessments that our department is constantly making in concert with labour market needs that are driven out of other departments. All of those are considerations that we take into account before tabling our levels plan. As you will know, we've tabled a levels plan that speaks clearly to how many refugees will resettle in Canada over the next number of years. We are a global leader in resettlement.