Citizenship and Immigration Committee on July 19th, 2016

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Okay.

Now, one of the things we heard yesterday from both the UNHCR and from government officials is that they actually don't track vulnerable groups. In this instance we're talking about LGBTI communities. They have no idea who is coming in who is identified with that group, and they have no idea who is coming into the country who is identified with that group.

To our colleague's point about the number of cases and how you're processing them, I would say that you're doing better than the government on that score.

That being said, how can we overcome this problem? Do you have any suggestions as to how we can address that? Would that be through the private sponsors who can make the identification, and would that, then, be processed perhaps through Rainbow or through any other organizations in that way? How can we address this issue of not being able to identify the groups? If we can't identify them, how do we provide assistance?

Okay, go ahead, Paul.

[Paul Tolnai]

It's interesting. As the Foundation of Hope, we are reached out to by people who are in need of assistance. It's amazing. When you don't have to go into a UNHCR camp and you don't have to go into an embassy or a consulate, these people on the Internet reach out very quickly to us, and we identify them with great ease. Then we pass them off to the actual service provider or to a group that can do it. They have obstacles. One, they need to find a group of people who are willing to do it. The gay community in Canada is tremendously giving. There are lots of people waiting to help. The second is that they need to find the funds to privately sponsor them. Then they have to fill out the myriad of forms that Rainbow Refugee is great at helping with, but it's not good enough. There's more that needs to be done.

Then we need to get the processing times down. I was reading over Chris' shoulder that in the UAE, it's seven months. Why in the UAE is it taking seven months? Being gay is illegal there. Why is it taking seven months to get to an interview from a country that doesn't have many other problems with it right now with regard to that issue. Why seven months? It's amazing.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

To that suggestion, then, it's actually having an international organization in those countries that can help identify individuals or groups that can come forward with the application, perhaps through Global Affairs Canada, Amnesty International. No, that's not something...? Okay.

Through groups that would be able to do this work would be one avenue to help identify individuals and help make that connection.

[Dylan Mazur]

I think the one thing that could happen is, as you said, Global Affairs could create a stream of funding for international human rights organizations. In a lot of cases in countries where being LGBT is criminalized, often LGBT organizations are very much underground. What does exist often is small to medium-sized human rights organizations that don't exclusively do LGBT work, but they are there on the ground. If there were a stream in which they could protect LGBT people and document their cases, this would help to document persecution on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. That would be one means of tracking it, and then forming this international relationship between those organizations and a sponsoring organization like Rainbow Refugee. That's one possibility.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you, Dylan.

Chad, did you want to add something to that?

[Chad Walters]

Yes, I just wanted to add too that we're talking about how we identify them, but we also have to think about the fact that there's a lot of self-identifying. A lot of these people are coming forward, and in that coming forward there's almost proof in their credibility because they're putting their lives at risk by coming forward, finding and seeking out these underground agencies, and saying, “Hey, I'm LGBT.” That, alone, in my opinion, is proof of credibility. It's dangerous to do that.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Okay. I want to go to the processing-time question, because you're exactly right. If you self-identify, or even if you're working with a group in countries where it is a crime, then you're putting yourself at extreme risk, and perhaps one of the reasons that the UNHCR can't really quite identify people is because people put themselves at risk by self-identifying.

To that end, on the processing time, what needs to be done? Chris you talked about how individuals leave their home country and go to another country and they're not in a better situation. In fact, they might be in a worse situation because of the discrimination in the laws that are there. How do we address this issue on the processing time? What needs to be done, and what is reasonable in terms of extracting someone from that situation so they don't put themselves at further risk?

[Christine Morrissey]

I'm going to say that we talk from the perspective of LGBT people, and there are likely to be other groups who could be equally identified for religious reasons, for example. I think that when an application comes in where clearly this is a group that has been identified as vulnerable, it needs to get priority. It needs to be put on top of the pile or in a separate pile, and not at the bottom of the pile and work its way up to the top. That's what happens now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you.

Mr. Ehsassi, you have seven minutes, please.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Ms. Nafziger, thank you ever so much for your opening remarks. The clarity of what you were speaking to was very helpful, so I'm very grateful.

You started off your opening remarks by saying you are here to draw from your experience and assist us help the most vulnerable. Now, as you know, one of the issues that have come up over the course of the past two days has been the practice of the UNHCR to recommend against countries prioritizing one group over another. I was wondering, given your lengthy experience in this field, whether you think that is a sound and prudent practice by the UNHCR.

[Gloria Nafziger]

When it comes to resettlement referrals, the UNHCR gives, as a matter of priority, priority to the most vulnerable. But I think we also have to understand the environment in which the UNHCR is operating: 20 million refugees, of which the UNHCR has identified just over one million who are in need of resettlement, of which just over 100,000 are actually resettled in any given year by the countries that step up to do resettlement.

The problem is not a problem in identification of refugees to be resettled or of vulnerable refugees; the problem is to have states stand up and actually come forward and be prepared to do the resettlement.

The numbers are atrocious. One of the ways that Canada needs to take leadership is by, as we have done, taking leadership in resettlement. There's a global conference coming up in the UN this September at which Canada has an opportunity to challenge all governments to respond to those vulnerable people the UNHCR is putting forward; to have a distribution system whereby countries are required to take refugees for resettlement who are identified by the UNHCR.

UNHCR is working under an incredible burden of numbers, without an adequate budget to do its job—the funding is voluntary. There are many challenges, so it is easy to criticize them, saying that they're not doing a good enough job of identifying the most vulnerable, without taking a look at the numbers to see what their actual capacity is in that regard.

That doesn't even take us anywhere close to a conversation about identifying internally displaced people.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you for that.

In another segment of your opening remarks, you alluded to the amazing work that a wide variety of international organizations are doing on the ground in various countries. One problem I have, and a recurring thing that I've heard in the past two days, concerns a number of private organizations that don't have lengthy experience broaching the topic of actually going to war-torn countries and deciding to do some work on the ground.

Given your experience and knowing of all the safeguards that have to be in place, the risks that obviously are there, and the procedures, the practices, the challenges, what would you say to organizations that are saying they would like to go to war-torn countries to do the grunt work?

[Gloria Nafziger]

I'm not sure what the context is: whether they're going to those countries in order to identify refugees for resettlement or going to provide humanitarian aid. One way or the other, clearly, in order to enter any kind of war situation in which one is working with vulnerable people, history and depth of experience are absolutely critical. It's a depth of experience that understands the entire context of a country: all of the political players, the impact of bringing a western—if they are western—organization or individuals into a country. Sometimes your very presence on the ground can in fact put people more at risk than your not being there.

Amnesty International is extremely cautious, when we go into any country. We always take precautions, because the presence of any outsider in a community is always known to everybody else in that environment, to know what your purpose is, what your goals are, whom you are working with. It takes incredible depth of political knowledge and savvy. Partners are absolutely critical; local partners are absolutely critical. The lists go on.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you.

My final question is this. At some point you talked about the reality that we need action on many fronts to assist with the staggering number of refugees in the world. Would you elaborate on that segment of your opening remarks?

[Gloria Nafziger]

When we look at refugees, there are three solutions that are always talked about: local integration, return to your home community, and finally resettlement as the third option. The resettlement option is always the last option. There's always the hope that there are opportunities for a return to your own country or for local integration in order for that to happen. Without a doubt the vast majority of people are never going to benefit from resettlement, so we really need to be looking at what we can do in terms of capacity-building in host countries or in source countries to ensure that there is stability within those countries so that they can realize the first two goals, which are local integration or a permanent return to your own country.

Humanitarian aid, development, capacity-building, all of those solutions are by far the answer. Resettlement is only a very small part of the answer, but to eliminate resettlement from that equation would be wrong as well.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you.

My last question is for Mr. Tolnai.

You referred to a group, which is the Iranian Railroad for Queer Refugees. It's a group I'm quite familiar with, given the lengthy work that it's done for quite a few years. Your suggestion was that it should try to establish as a charitable organization, which seems like a very sensible approach to the issue. As I understand, as long as an organization has two years of experience, it's not a very difficult process.

Are you aware of all the various requirements that are needed to establish a non-profit organization?

[Paul Tolnai]

For sure, based in B.C., obviously I know it from that perspective. Each province will have its own intricacies with doing it; however, the federal system is somewhat homogenous across the country. In fact, IRQR is in the process of requesting registered status from the CRA, which will enable it to get the funding. However, in emergent situations like this, where we have a critical need immediately, that wait is unacceptable. When you're dealing with a six-year wait for an interview, and now you've put two years on it, people will die before we get help to them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you.

I'd like to thank the panel members for their insights, for their recommendations. As a Canadian I'm very proud that, because of the work of your organizations, associated organizations, and your volunteers, you've put Canada at the forefront of creating a veritable rainbow railroad for some of the most victimized individuals around the planet.

Thank you for your good work.

We will now adjourn. I'd just like to remind our committee members that we will be reconvening for the next session in 20 minutes

Thank you.