Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 7th, 2019

[The Acting Chair, Liberal, Nick Whalen]

You have just 25 seconds, but I do note this was answered in response to a question by Mr. Sarai.

[John Ossowski]

I can take that.

I think this is just another tool for us to put in place, and other countries are doing this. The United Kingdom does this. They try to engage, in a positive way, with the country to make sure they understand our interests in taking their people back—

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

In other words, this is just basically a stick. It's a threat, to say that we're going to do this.

[John Ossowski]

What I said earlier was—

[The Acting Chair, Liberal, Nick Whalen]

We'll move on to Ms. Zahid.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thanks to the officials.

What period did the AG study? From which year to which year was the report by the AG based on?

[John Ossowski]

It was January 2015 to June 30, 2018.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Since then, has the government made any investments or changes that directly respond to the Auditor General's findings and recommendations? Can you please explain what changes you have made or what resources have been invested beyond that period?

[John Ossowski]

I can start from our side, certainly.

There were investments in budget 2018, certainly, that we took advantage of to help us adjust to this new posture that we needed to respond to, and then subsequently in budget 2019. There has been a continuous evolution throughout the period the AG examined. Since the AG's study ended, we've been looking at investments to increase our efficiency in how we process people before they arrive, in the interdiction work that we do with our U.S. counterparts; and when they arrive; and the process after that, including the IRB and subsequent removal, should they be found not to be in need of protection.

[Lori MacDonald]

Mr. Chair, the investments that we've seen are supportive of those kinds of pillars where we're focusing our attention on the issue in order to increase the capacity to respond to the volumes, to be more efficient and to work collectively and more closely in our processes and deterrents.

In various pockets, we see investment across the various departments. Some examples are, at IRCC, approximately $280 million; and at IRB, approximately $208 million. These are monies invested to help us increase our capacity and efficiency. They include things such as ramping up with new resources to actually be able to respond to the volume of claims that we have, and at the same time, putting things in place, such as structures that I spoke about earlier in terms of our asylum management board, working together more effectively across the broader spectrum.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Now, if someone coming through the regular border has made a claim, processing will be done by the officials of the IRCC. Is there any training program in place for those officers who would be doing the PRRA hearings?

[Louis Dumas]

I'm very proud of the work that has been done by colleagues at the RCMP and CBSA, and also at IRCC, addressed specifically at making sure that we have well-managed migration flows in respect to irregular migrants. We want the process to be fair. We want the process to recognize the fact that it's not illegal to claim asylum in Canada, and to make sure that these people are treated in a fair and humane manner.

People are being processed in an extremely efficient fashion. For example, they receive interim federal help within a few days. They also receive work permits, because we want these individuals to access the labour market very quickly. It is done in a very integrated fashion. That's why last year we had the pilot called the integrated claim analysis centre, by which we were coming together, with our colleagues from the CBSA and IRB and IRCC, and looking at how best to perform the process in order to make sure that it is fast and efficient.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

What is the difference between the hearing process at the IRB and the PRRA? Can you please explain how these two processes differ?

[The Acting Chair, Liberal, Nick Whalen]

Are you sharing your time with Mr. DeCourcey?

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Yes, I'll share my time with my colleague.

[André Baril, Senior Director, Refugee Affairs, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

The refugee protection division is a quasi-judicial tribunal. It's similar to a court setting, so if the minister's delegate intervenes, it becomes adversarial.

In a pre-removal risk assessment context, it's an IRCC official who reviews the application, and in the case where there's a hearing, would interview the applicant through that hearing.

[Paul MacKinnon]

Remember that they both look at the same issues to determine refugee determination. It's the refugee convention and the convention against torture, so they're looking at the same standard.

[The Acting Chair, Liberal, Nick Whalen]

Ms. Zahid, you can continue for another minute and a half. I believe Mr. DeCourcey has access to Mr. Tabbara's time.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I have one question for the CBSA officials.

I believe in the past there has been some confusion regarding the security screening applied to asylum seekers. Could you please describe the security process that happens during a border crossing, and the security process that happens once a claim is found eligible to be heard?

[John Ossowski]

When somebody shows up at a port of entry, certainly for all refugee claimants we conduct a series of processes using both biographic and biometric information. We do criminality checks with CPIC and NCIC, which is the U.S. criminal information system, and we would share biometric information with our partners to see if they've had claims in other countries.

There's an interview where we gather all that information and make sure we're dealing with all the inadmissibility issues first, and then we would get into the eligibility aspects. They have to be, first of all, admissible to Canada; and then we would deal with the eligibility for claiming asylum.

Subsequent to that process, when they finally have their hearing with the Immigration and Refugee Board, we do a more indepth screening process. That's looking more at national security threats and organized crime things where we would check other databases and work with our national security partners, specifically CSIS.

[The Acting Chair, Liberal, Nick Whalen]

We are now moving on to five-minute rounds, beginning with Mr. Maguire.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Did the CBSA review the legislation it would take to close the loophole for anchor relatives arriving at point of entry?

[John Ossowski]

We're into the safe third country agreement.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Yes.

[John Ossowski]

We've certainly been participating in conversations with U.S. officials, along with our colleagues from IRCC, and under the minister's leadership. Yes, we've—