Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Nov. 29th, 2018

[Jean-Nicolas Beuze]

That's totally right in terms of the norm, but the compact does not address those situations. The compact addresses the situation of the front-line countries in sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, Asia and down south in Central America, which do not necessarily have the financial means, the services, the refugee status determination procedures in place to support, on their own, the response to a mass arrival of refugees such as we have seen with the Rohingya, the South Sudanese or the Syrians.

The compact does not address the situations that you are referring to.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Right. I understand that. Because of the geography, because of the principle behind the compact, from what I understand....

I just wanted to be clear, because in those circumstances, irrespective of the geography, if you were to apply the principles of the compact throughout the globe no matter where the asylum seekers might be, those kinds of practices would not be consistent with the compact. That's what I'm trying to get an understanding of, and that's the answer I—

[Jean-Nicolas Beuze]

And with the 1951 convention, which is, as I mentioned earlier, not only a legally binding instrument on states party to the convention but which also contains customary international law by which asylum seekers should be entitled to the protection of the state where the claimants are known. That's correct.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much. In fact, I was trying to get that answer to see whether or not a country that engages in that kind of practice is acting consistently with the 1951 convention. Thank you for that answer, because I couldn't quite actually get that answer from our own officials with IRCC.

Professor Smith, as you mentioned in your comments, irregular migrants impact other states, because clearly there is an implication. However, because the compact is geographically located and targets a different set of community members, in the situation in the United States, which is not part of the compact, we have asylum seekers trying to get to safety and unable to do so because tear gas is being thrown at them. The U.S. has made a declaration that those who are fleeing domestic violence or gang violence would not be able to make an asylum claim, and there's the latest with the LGBTQ community in terms of identity.

Given that this is the environment, how would you suggest the international community deal with that? Will there be a provision or an attempt through the international community to address this situation, whether it's through the compact or otherwise?

[Craig Damian Smith]

I still think we're moving between the GCR and the GCM—the two compacts—a bit in the way that we're discussing this.

If Canada wants to do something about the situation on the border with Mexico and the U.S., the provisions in the compact that allow them to do that are to address the displacement situation in Central America through the regional MIRPS process.

I can send you the report that I wrote for Global Affairs Canada about this. The level of violence and ecological degradation and other push factors in the northern triangle of Central American countries is quite profound and requires a sustained and massive increase in international assistance if we want to forestall the types of irregular migration crises that give rise to this type of behaviour on the border.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I would appreciate it if you can send that to the committee. I think every member in this committee could benefit from it.

I wonder if there's anything else to add from you, Mr. Beuze.

[Jean-Nicolas Beuze]

As you know, the state of affairs in international relations means that there's no international police. There is a security council here that is the ultimate decision-making body that can decide when there is an infringement on peace and security under chapter 7 by one of the member states. Otherwise, it's just good relationships between neighbours, as was well explained by Professor Smith. Therefore, it's the responsibility of each member of the international community to try to hold each other accountable when one country does not seem to be able or willing to abide by the norms of the 1951 convention, or any other norm, and to help and support them through advocacy, technical support, funding, and so on and so forth.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

There are those who argue that Canada should not be part of the compact. In fact, I just got a couple of emails from my own constituents saying, “This is very dangerous. It's really bad for Canada. Please, please, please make sure that we are not part of that.”

To those who make those comments, what would you say?

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Say it very briefly.

[Craig Damian Smith]

I'd reiterate what I said: that a world of well-governed and well-managed migration is in every state's interest and that it meets basic criteria of upholding and protecting vulnerable people's rights.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

You have 10 seconds.

[Jean-Nicolas Beuze]

To add to that, there is a long tradition of Canada supporting the most vulnerable abroad. Canadians should be proud of that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

That's it. Thanks.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I just want to clarify on the time question, Mr. Chair. My Conservative colleagues were given extra time, as you've noted. Important questions were asked and extra time was given. That was at your discretion, although not according to the rules that govern this committee. I'm just wondering at what point there will be discretion given to other committee members to have that extension of time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

There often is, and if you would like the total number of minutes you've been given discretionarily since I became chair, I have that number.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Well, thank you very much—

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

If you would like that, I'm happy to give that to you.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Yes. More specifically in this committee meeting today, though, that was an explicit provision given. I don't disagree with that, Mr. Chair, but when that is being applied, I think it's fair to say it should apply to all members.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you.

Mr. Tabbara is next.

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to follow up on what my colleague was saying.

There are those who say that the global compact for migration aims to erase national borders or encourage irregular border crossings, and I think this is dangerous to say. The objectives of this global compact are for “safe, orderly and regular migration”. It outlines it in objective 23: “Strengthen international cooperation and global partnerships for safe, orderly and regular migration”.

I want to turn your attention to objective number 5, “Enhance availability and flexibility of pathways for regular migration”. As we noted in the testimonies, there are eastern European countries that have pulled out of that migration. I think it's dangerous. If we look not too far away from us, kind of in our own backyard, at Mexico, there are smugglers who make up to $2,000 a day smuggling individuals. They make up to $200 smuggling a Mexican migrant and up to $500 for a non-Mexican migrant. An individual working in a factory in Juárez, a border city, makes up to $5 a day. You can see the discrepancy here.

I think that when states pull out of the global compact for migration, they are essentially creating or fostering this type of human smuggling. It is very dangerous for individuals, because it keeps the most vulnerable individuals in the hands of smugglers. Women and girls can be susceptible to sex trafficking, and this can be very dangerous.

Canada has put a gender lens on its foreign policy to protect the most vulnerable, and that could be women and children. Can you add to that on why states need to get on board with this global compact and ensure that the most vulnerable are protected?

[Craig Damian Smith]

It's a very important question, and the dynamics are very important.

I've spent several years working in irregular migration systems, as we call them, in north Africa, the Middle East and the Balkans, and now increasingly in Central America. The very basic fact of irregular migration—why markets exist for smuggling and trafficking—is that prohibition in the face of market demand creates illicit markets. People want to move and people need to move. As you mentioned, there are vast economic discrepancies between states, which act as the kind of push-and-pull factors generally.

When you force people to undertake irregular journeys with increasingly sophisticated and networked criminalized smuggling rings, very often they overlap with trafficking, and people can become trapped on their journeys. Women and girls can be pushed into situations of trafficking. Domestic labour is a major trend, but also forced sex work. It's a big issue that doesn't lend itself well to very simple solutions and policy statements, but the simple fact is the market dynamics that I alluded to.

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Beuze, do you want to comment as well?

[Jean-Nicolas Beuze]

That's one of the issues that overlaps in both contexts, migration and refugees. It's the whole issue of trafficking and smuggling, as well as a few other issues. For the very reason explained by Professor Smith, the concern is that you increase the risk for persons who are already vulnerable, because they are fleeing situations of persecution or conflict, to fall into the hands of criminal organizations, hoping they will be helped to find safety but being trapped into trafficking and sexual and other forms of exploitation and contemporary forms of slavey.

As a result, it's important that we create legal pathways for asylum seekers as well as migrants—but I'm speaking about asylum seekers—for them not to have to resort to those practices.

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you.

We also had testimony from our former foreign affairs minister, Lloyd Axworthy. He recommended to the committee and to the Government of Canada to confiscate frozen assets of crooked foreign leaders and use the money for the benefit of the population they have swindled.

Do you agree with taking certain assets from certain rogue states and putting it into resources where we can help asylum seekers and refugees?

[Jean-Nicolas Beuze]

UNHCR has no position on this issue. IRCC and GAC colleagues have responded that they are going to explore very closely the legal and policy framework that will be required to do so.

What is important for my organization as well as all the NGOs is that whether or not this works, we need additional funding to deliver the services that are required on the ground to protect and assist refugees.