Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 4th, 2016

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

I think the issue she's raising is that there are additional people who want to come to Canada who are part of her family, and she's feeling as though for cohorts outside of the Syrian community—and I am by no means trying to belittle the urgency of the Syrian crisis—the reunification efforts are not equitable at this point.

So as I turn the microphone over to my colleague, I will be referring her file to your office.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Do that.

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

Certainly I understand that there are only certain priorities that can be priorities, but we also have to show a sense of equity in terms of managing humanitarian needs, and that's something I would stand up for on her behalf.

With that, I'll turn it over to Mr. Saroya.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Mr. Saroya, go ahead for three minutes.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

I totally agree with that.

[Bob Saroya, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I see Mr. McCallum more than I see my family, both here and in Markham. We've worked together in Markham as well.

The greatest number of calls I get are from students. You mentioned something earlier, and you can finish what you were saying. We have a number of students calling us every day. They've been here for the last two or three or four years. They have done their degrees and they're ready to work. They are having a rough time getting into the workforce. Is there any plan for the students? Can we refer them to your office or what is the future plan for these kids? Do they need to go back or can something be done for them here?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

We have post-graduate employment that they are allowed to take part in for a certain period of time. The main thing that we as a government are going to do that's new is to have more points for students under express entry. I'm not saying it was done on purpose, but I think they were a little bit shortchanged by the previous system, because if you have to get a labour market impact assessment and you're in an entry-level job, then it's difficult. So if they have more points, a higher fraction of the international students will be accepted as permanent residents. Some of them may have problems with being able to stay beyond a certain time, maybe because of this four-year rule. That is a different issue, but it's related and we're looking at that now that we've received the parliamentary report.

The main thing that we as a government are doing is to give more points to admit more students as permanent residents.

[Bob Saroya, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Going back to the students one more time, the restaurant industry, the service industry, the agriculture industry, and the food industry are looking for labour, and these people speak the language, understand the system and they're eager to work. If something can be done, that will mean immediate success for the employers as well as for the students.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

They're allowed to work, but they have to get a job. Are you saying they have trouble finding a job? Is that the problem?

[Bob Saroya, Conservative, Markham—Unionville, ON]

The jobs are available, but they're not allowed to work. If someone has qualified as an accountant, he cannot work in the restaurant. So the restaurant guys would love to hire the person, but he can't work there because it's not the job in his trade.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Could you give a quick response, please, Mr. Orr?

[Robert Orr]

You can follow up on that, but essentially, yes, we are hoping that those who graduate in a certain area will be working in the area in which they have studied. However, there are opportunities for students to work and to join the labour market after they've completed their studies.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you, Mr. Orr.

Ms. Kwan, go ahead for seven minutes please.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I thank the minister and his staff for coming before the committee.

First I would like to ask the minister why at this time the ministry is continuing to revoke the cases of up to some 60 individuals each month who have been found to have misrepresented their citizenship application. The minister acknowledged publicly that there isn't procedural fairness for processing these cases because they don't have that under Bill C-24 and it has not yet been fixed under Bill C-6, so an individual family could be impacted including children who may have, through no fault of their own, been caught up in the situation through the misrepresentation. Will the minister agree that a moratorium should be put in place with respect to revoking citizenship applications based on misrepresentation until such time as the process has been addressed?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Just by coincidence, I was asked exactly the same question in the Senate question period about half an hour ago, and I said we would look into it. The basic point I made was that I think citizenship should be revoked for people who misrepresent, if that's the situation, but I also think that people should have a right to a proper appeal. Right now, the system is such that there is a review or some appeal. I think it was you who put forward an amendment to Bill C-6—correct me if I'm wrong—to strengthen that appeal process, but it was declared out of scope.

Senator Omidvar is now proposing an amendment to strengthen the appeal right, and I have said that I'm open to that and I like the idea. We don't know yet whether the Senate will rule that to be in scope or out of scope. In the House they said it was out of scope, but the Senate rules are different, so I don't know.

I would certainly welcome that, if she makes that amendment, if it's in scope, and if the Senate accepts it. I said I would look at it, but I don't think we would have a moratorium. I think we have a system that could be improved—as I have just acknowledged—but it has been going for some years. I am hopeful we will have an amendment of that kind accepted in the bill.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you for that, Minister. I appreciate that.

I guess my point is that the process is broken and unfair. I am not saying people should not have their citizenship revoked, but they should have the opportunity to have an independent hearing, present their case, have compassion and humanitarian reasons be considered, and then have a decision be made by an independent person. That's all I am asking.

In the meantime, until this gets fixed, I think the people without due process should be afforded due process. That is the reason why I am asking for a moratorium. I'll park that with the minister, and I hope he will consider it, because I think it would be a welcome move for many people.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Okay.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

The second question I'd like to ask the minister is this. The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act specifies that refugees can make application within the one-year window of opportunity for bringing families over to Canada. In addition to that, through this experience, many refugees come forward to say that their traditional definition of “family” is different from what we understand it to be. I wonder whether there is any consideration of revising the family unit for refugees.

Also, there is a previous law, from the Conservative government, around cessation—that if you travel back as a refugee to your country of origin, you could actually have your status revoked. That has huge implications, and it is ongoing at the moment. That, too, has not yet been fixed, on the cessation laws. Over 25,000 Syrian refugees have now arrived. Have we told them that if they travel, for whatever reason, back to their country of origin, they could lose their status? If we haven't, that could actually happen to them, and it's not right. That is not what we want to do. Again, I wonder whether there are any plans from the government to deal with the cessation issue.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

I'll refer the question about the definition of “family” to Mr. Orr in a moment.

On cessation, we are now in the process of doing a review or an overview, some reforms to our asylum system, such as the designated country of origin issue, two tiers of countries. Cessation comes into this. This is a bill that will be received by this committee. I think your point about cessation could be covered in that bill. It hasn't been completed yet, but it could be a part of that.

The one-year window.... Is the traditional definition of “family” the same for the family class, or is it broader?

[Robert Orr]

It's the same.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

It's the same.

I know one can always make the case for broader. It's difficult to do that, because then the numbers become so very large. We went partially in that direction when we gave more points for people under express entry if they had siblings in Canada, on the grounds that having family here would help them settle in faster. To broaden the definition of “family” to include.... I don't know how far you want to go—cousins? The problem is that it would become so large.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

On the cessation, I actually have tabled a private member's bill. It's a simple fix, actually—two clauses. I would urge the minister to act on that. It would make a big difference, I think, as well.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

We will look at it.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

On a related issue—

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

You have 30 seconds.