Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Feb. 25th, 2016

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

Thank you very much, both of you, for being here.

Given the discretionary nature of the assessment of applications for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, similar cases might have different outcomes. What resources are available for people who applied for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds but were denied?

[Michel Dupuis]

The question is really about people who have been refused, resources for people who have been refused.

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

Yes.

[Michel Dupuis]

People whose applications have been refused would be able to reapply or seek redress through the courts. There are no internal processes or review processes for people who have had their applications refused. It is like any other application submitted on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. The process after a negative decision would be similar to those applicable in other cases. There are no special procedures for people whose applications have been refused.

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

Many individuals applying for permanent residence status on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, following the lifting of the temporary suspension of removals, have been living in Canada for a prolonged period, and many have established well-integrated lives in Canadian society. In such cases, could an immigration officer give a positive decision on an application for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds?

[Michel Dupuis]

This is one of the main criteria for giving a positive answer. The links and the establishment in Canada as a whole would be one of the main factors in a positive decision. The more the applicant can demonstrate links to Canada, their family, and in other ways, the greater chance they have of being accepted. Really, the ties, the links, and the personal circumstances of the person—it could be family circumstances here or in the country of origin—would be considered.

The officers making these decisions and processing these files, as we said before, have a great deal of experience in making sure that they assess and look at all aspects of the questions raised by the applicant. They have a duty to consider all of the information and all of the requests in the submission made by the applicant to make their case. They have a duty to assess each and every element of the application carefully before reaching a decision, especially before making a refusal.

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

Have any Canadian peer countries, for example, the United States, Australia, New Zealand, or the U.K., instituted a temporary halt on deportations to Haiti or Zimbabwe? If so, which ones, and on what basis did they institute this temporary suspension? Have these other countries recommenced removals?

[Maia Welbourne]

I'm sorry. I'm not aware of what other countries may have done or not done, but we could look into that, if you'd like, and get back to the committee.

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

Thank you. Those are all of the questions that I have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you. We will move on to the Honourable Ms. Bergen.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being here.

As I understand it, there are approximately 3,500 people who would be subjected to the removal but who could apply under humanitarian grounds for permanent residency. Of that, about 2,200 have applied, and there's been about a 93% success rate in terms of their applications. However, we don't know where the other folks are, the difference between the 3,500 and the 2,200. We don't know where they are, so there's an attempt to reach out through social media.

Of that difference, would they have been working in Canada over the last 10 years? Would they have been employed?

[Michel Dupuis]

We also find that a fair share of these people are failed refugee claimants. As a failed claimant, you do have the right to work, so people could work with the proper work permit. For example, if people who are subject to a removal order apply for a PRRA, they could also apply for a work permit.

Some people would be eligible to apply and obtain a work permit and find work in Canada.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

I'm just trying to ascertain.... I find it interesting that we allowed people to come in, saying that they were going to be here for a short period or a limited period of time because where they live was unsafe, and then we just stopped. We don't know where they are.

I would assume that they're also receiving health care. Is that true? Would they be receiving health care in their provinces?

[Michel Dupuis]

The only people who would receive health care.... They need to be eligible for the IFH program, for example. That would be failed refugee claimants.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

I'm sorry, I'm talking about initially. In your presentation, you said that for more than 10 years Haitians and Zimbabweans were allowed to stay in Canada due to unsafe conditions in their home countries. When they were here fully and legitimately, because our collective government allowed it, would those people have been working, receiving health care, and living as full citizens, as it were, in Canada? They wouldn't have been voting, but they would have had every other right.

I'm just trying to see how we could lose track of them and not know where they are so that, when we have to contact them again and say that circumstances have changed, we're not at a complete loss. We don't know where they are and we have to depend on social media to try to reach them.

[Maia Welbourne]

It's fair to say that this group of individuals reflects a diverse group, potentially. It may be individuals who have come and filed refugee claims that have been unsuccessful. It may also be individuals who have come here for work or other purposes and who have lost their status. It's a bundle of individuals.

I wouldn't want to give the impression that we have lost track of them. Some of them may have left. If they don't report in to either the Canada Border Services Agency or to our department—Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada—we have no way of knowing if they have, in fact, left the country. However, as part of our outreach campaign, we do intend to write letters. To do so, we will use the last known address of the individual in question.

Again, we don't know precisely how many are still in the country and how many may have left, but we do have an idea of what status they had at one point and where we might be able to reach them.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

That would have been, then, how this...because of this decision, about 3,200 Haitians and 300 Zimbabweans could have been subject to removal from Canada.

How was that determined, the 3,200 and the 300? What circumstances defined those people as being subject to removal from Canada?

[Michel Dupuis]

According to the numbers we have, the majority of them are failed refugee claimants or refugee claimants.

As my colleague pointed out, our numbers are approximate. We say that in the notes. If people have left without informing CBSA or IRCC, it would be very difficult for us to confirm their departure from Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you, Ms. Bergen.

Mr. Sarai.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Thank you.

On that same note, first, there seems to be a little discrepancy in numbers, although I understand they're estimates.

Of the total of 3,500 identified, 2,200 had applied under the previous program that ran in 2014, leaving about 1,300. Then we say that 2,200 have already reapplied. It seems like another 900 got added into the system.

Would these 900 be those who came in since last time, or would they be those who have now been identified and who were not part of the original estimates?

[Michel Dupuis]

The numbers would not include people who have applied under other streams. People who may have been affected by the temporary suspension of removals or even special measures could have applied under other streams, such as family classification, inland, regular H and C, but not within the special measures.

This is why we say that the numbers are very difficult to confirm. There are people leaving without us knowing, people not contacting departments or stakeholders to say that they're impacted by these measures, and people who have applied under other programs.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Thank you.

I was very impressed by both the amount of people who applied to this program and the processing time. It seems that in under a month close to 50% have been processed. I want to commend your department for doing that.

On the previous program that was announced in December 2014, we know that 2,200 applied. However, has a decision been rendered in all those applications?

[Michel Dupuis]

My colleague can say more, but I think we've provided that number. More than 1,000 have been accepted.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

That was under this program. What about the one previously?

[Maia Welbourne]

I just want to clarify that the numbers we're talking about are all under the previous program, which was in place between December 1 and June of 2015. In fact we have not yet started to process any applications received since the February 4 announcement.