Evidence of meeting #38 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cases.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Sharon Chomyn  Area Director, North Europe and the Gulf, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Mark Giralt  Area Director, United States and Caribbean, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Olivier Jacques  Area Director, Latin America, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Elizabeth Snow  Area Director, North Asia, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Shannon Fraser  Area Director, South Asia, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Alexandra Hiles  Area Director, Sub-Saharan Africa, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

8 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj

Good morning, everyone.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on February 25, the committee will resume its study on family reunification.

This morning, we have officials from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration with us. We have Ms. Sharon Chomyn, area director, North Europe and the Gulf, by video conference from London. Thank you, Ms. Chomyn, for getting all of us up and at it early today here in Ottawa, Washington, and Mexico City. We have Mr. Mark Giralt, area director, United States and Caribbean, by video conference as well from Washington, and Mr. Olivier Jacques, area director, Latin America, and he's with us from Mexico City.

I understand that you'll be not splitting time in seven-minute slots, but you'll be using 21 minutes combined.

We'll being with Ms. Chomyn from London.

8 a.m.

Sharon Chomyn Area Director, North Europe and the Gulf, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning. My name is Sharon Chomyn, and I'm the immigration program manager at the Canadian High Commission in London, England. I'm also the area director overseeing the visa offices in London, Moscow, Warsaw, Kiev, Vienna, Abu Dhabi, Riyadh, Accra, and Islamabad.

With me today are my colleagues in Mexico City and Washington, who will provide brief comments on their own that focus on their own areas of responsibility.

It's my pleasure to have the opportunity to address the committee and to give the perspective of the public service employees overseas who have the responsibility for processing family reunification applications, among others, in a timely and responsible fashion. I will begin by giving you some general context about our network and the processing of family class applications.

Canada has a network of 51 processing offices overseas. These offices are responsible for assessing applications from foreign nationals to come to Canada on a temporary or permanent basis. Depending upon which office we are referring to, there are particular local challenges in addition to those commonly shared.

The cases we will focus on today are a minority of the overall applications received. The department uses its global case management system to expedite processing by sending the lowest-risk applications for processing to our centralized processing centres in Mississauga and Ottawa. Currently, these processing centres manage as much as 10% of the overseas family-class caseload. This allows our missions to better manage their caseloads and to concentrate more resources on complex cases or those that require local expertise.

The department continues to work hard to ensure that applications for legitimate, bona fide family class applicants are processed as efficiently and in as timely a manner as possible in order to reunite applicants with their sponsors in Canada.

Most simple and non-contentious applications are approved rapidly. Unlike applications in the economic categories, family class applicants need only establish their relationship to an approved sponsor and demonstrate to the officer that they are not inadmissible to Canada. In most cases, globally speaking, the genuineness of the relationship is not in question. In many countries, there are very reliable means to prove family relationships. In general, we are able to process cases from such countries confidently, given the reliability of the vital statistics documents.

As we were asked to talk about challenges we experience, we will focus our opening remarks on the various challenges we confront in processing the more complex cases.

In much of the world, documentation is extremely unreliable. State-issued documents can be improperly obtained, and registration is decentralized or essentially non-existent. These limitations require officers to use other means to determine whether applicants are in fact related to, or in a genuine relationship with, their sponsors. Ongoing training in fraudulent documents and close liaison with our risk assessment officers help immensely in the official assessment of these cases.

When no other conclusive evidence can be obtained, applicants and sponsors may be asked to submit to DNA testing in order to establish a claimed relationship. The big picture is that the goal of our officers is to approve as many applications as possible as efficiently as possible based on the documents before them. That said, they are also very well trained in the latest fraud trends, with a view to remaining vigilant to potential fraud that might undermine the integrity of our immigration system or the security of Canada.

I would like to say a few words specifically related to the reunification of spouses. We are aware that this is an issue of specific concern to the committee and that it is in the public interest to reunite spouses as quickly as possible. The vast majority of cases are genuine, and we are pleased to bring people together.

With such cases, the most common integrity concern is that of the genuineness of the relationship. Marriage fraud is a very real problem, more common in some parts of the world, but by no means absent elsewhere. This is where the local knowledge of our locally engaged staff proves to be invaluable, and our programs benefit from this contextual knowledge to aid in detecting divergences from typical cultural and/or social practices.

Awareness of the cultural norms of a particular society helps our officers facilitate the processing of the genuine cases while alerting them to situations that might not be quite right. In this regard, officers may request that applicants provide further documents or attend an interview if the relationship does not appear to be genuine or if the officers harbour doubts about the circumstances. The goal of all of these additional requests is to alleviate the concerns the officers may have and allow them to approve the application. These requests are always made after careful consideration of the information already on file, given our understanding that providing additional documentation or travelling to attend an interview may cause additional inconvenience or cost to the applicant.

Our department employs various means to mitigate the risk posed by fraud. We share intelligence with like-minded countries and, in some cases, work with the host countries. We verify information provided in applications as resources permit, and ongoing quality assurance activities serve to confirm that the level of risk being accepted is reasonable. Our goal is always to process applications efficiently and respectfully of the applicants; and to ensure, to the extent possible, that low-risk cases are processed quickly and that the more complex cases are approached systematically and equitably.

In spite of the various challenges, between 47,000 and 50,000 spouses, partners, and dependent children have been issued permanent resident visas every year since 2011. In 2016, we will admit even more, 60,000, in order to help reduce processing times. The vast majority of these cases are entirely legitimate and we are pleased to facilitate this family reunification.

Finally, as I am aware that the committee has a particular interest in the family reunification movement from certain areas of the region I oversee, I will speak briefly to the particular challenges that we deal with in my region of responsibility. The London visa office processes family class applications for residents of Pakistan, as well as more complex cases from elsewhere in our territory. I will illustrate what I mean by “complex” with examples from the area that I oversee.

A complex case from the U.K. or the Nordic countries may involve criminal convictions or custody issues. Our officers take custody issues very seriously as these cases may result in the permanent separation of a child from one parent. Accordingly, these may take longer to process than the departmental standard. For applications processed in our Abu Dhabi office, complex cases may include, among other factors, elements of proxy marriage, minor-aged spouses, polygamous relationships, or where the intention to actually reside in Canada is not clear. Another concern of which we must remain aware is the possibility that a marriage is not consensual. A small, but disturbing number of vulnerable applicants, or sponsors, are forced into a marriage and the subsequent sponsorship process. These situations pose a unique challenge, as often the individual is threatened with harm and will be hesitant to divulge the true circumstances.

For applications processed at our Accra office, complex cases could involve marriages of convenience, polygamy, children born outside of primary relationships, late registration of birth, and previous adverse immigration history on the part of the applicant. London took charge of the family reunification program from Pakistan in February 2014, primarily due to the security situation in that country. Our office has extensive experience in processing Pakistani cases in both the family class and the economic categories.

We have added resources to ensure that these applications would in fact be processed more efficiently in London than in Islamabad. I'm pleased to report that our office was successful in reducing the processing times of these cases to within the departmental standard.

Complexities inherent in this caseload include concerns related to the validity of marriages, non-consensual marriages, irregularities in the issuance of civil documentation, and security concerns. Where such concerns exist, applicants may be asked to provide further documentation or to attend an in-person interview. London-based officers travel to Islamabad four to five times per year for this purpose.

Finally, we also maintain a focus on applications from parents and grandparents, as we understand that bringing the family together in Canada can provide more stability and support for the family members already in Canada. Currently London is processing applications for parents and grandparents promptly upon receipt, and all applications sent to London from the case processing centre in Mississauga in 2016 are in active process or have been finalized.

Mr. Chair, this concludes my opening remarks. My colleagues will each provide their own brief remarks, following which we will be pleased to answer any questions you might have.

8:10 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj

Thank you.

Mr. Giralt.

November 15th, 2016 / 8:10 a.m.

Mark Giralt Area Director, United States and Caribbean, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My name is Mark Giralt, and I am the area director for the United States and the Caribbean, a territory that includes processing offices here in the United States as well as those in Port-au-Prince, Port of Spain, and Kingston.

For our offices in Port-au-Prince, Port of Spain, and Kingston, the majority of permanent resident applications received are in the family class. Many of the temporary resident visa services at these offices involve visits with families and include super visa applications. One of the biggest challenges is being able to communicate quickly and effectively with applicants. Although these offices cover relatively small areas, the infrastructure in many countries is poor, especially outside of the major centres.

Nowhere are these challenges more pronounced than in Haiti, which lacks a functioning postal system and where many clients do not have access to email. Cellphone use is increasing, but coverage is poor. Despite this, cellphones remain the means of communication most relied upon by Haitians, so the office in Port-au-Prince uses a commercial text messaging tool to communicate with clients.

Haiti is also still reeling from the impact of Hurricane Andrew, and rebuilding from the devastating 2010 earthquake is still very slow. The challenges posed by poor communications infrastructure will be with us for the foreseeable future, but we continue to look for innovative solutions. We also have significant concern around the reliability of the civil registry documents and records that are necessary to demonstrate existing relationships. Birth registration procedures can be open to fraud and abuse, and raise critical program integrity concerns.

In Kingston we receive many late-registered birth certificates. This limits their value as reliable evidence of a historical relationship. In these cases, identification of such concerns and the offer of DNA testing as an alternative early in the process has helped to reduce processing times and address program integrity concerns.

It can also be disheartening to see the lengths that some non-eligible applicants will go to in order to obtain a visa for Canada. Every day our officers across the world uncover fraudulent documents submitted in support of applications. Some of this fraud is very crude, but we often see fraudulent documentation that is very sophisticated. There is a vibrant industry in many countries that manufactures and distributes documents whose primary purpose is to allow an applicant to fraudulently obtain a visa for another country. Canada is not alone in this respect. At our missions overseas, we regularly meet to share information and methods with our counterparts from Australia, the United States, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. While we all encounter the same types of challenges, we are also able to work together to find solutions.

Spousal applications often have other complexities. For example, Kingston has found that up to 25% of applications are from persons who have been previously deported or have criminality concerns. Up to 10% of sponsors do not meet the legislative sponsorship requirements. Marriages of convenience are also of concern, making triaging for low-risk applications challenging.

These high-risk caseloads require significant resources, as more applicants must be interviewed. This can ultimately contribute to longer processing times for genuine applications. In recent years, we have actively moved applications between offices in the area, with officers travelling from our office in Port of Spain to Kingston and Port-au-Prince to conduct interviews. This approach has helped to reduce wait times. By managing the offices regionally, effective exchange of local knowledge has helped to keep the program risk at an acceptable level.

Thank you for the opportunity to address the committee. I believe my colleague from Mexico City has a few remarks to make.

8:15 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj

Mr. Jacques.

8:15 a.m.

Olivier Jacques Area Director, Latin America, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Chair, thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee. My name is Olivier Jacques and I am the area director for Latin America, which includes our visa offices in Bogota, Buenos Aires, Lima, Mexico, Sao Paulo and Havana. I will provide you with a summary of the family reunification movement in Latin America, and the challenges we face in managing it.

At the outset, I would like to reiterate Ms. Chomyn's comment that our officers do their best to ensure that legitimate, bona fide family class applicants are reunited with their sponsors in Canada as quickly as possible.

The members of the committee probably know that processing in the region has been increasingly centralized in our mission in Mexico. Our office has developed a solid knowledge transfer strategy. Through area trips, reporting, briefings, timely training from subject matter experts, quality assurance exercises, round table discussions, and effective communication with missions in the region, Mexico has increased processing quality and efficiency. However, as mentioned, there are some regions where we have concerns as to the genuineness of the relationship. This results in officers interviewing greater numbers of applicants. In El Salvador, Cuba and the Dominican Republic, for example, officers interview 40% of applicants on location.

In some instances, applicants and their families are known to pay tens of thousands of dollars for the opportunity to be sponsored by a Canadian citizen or permanent resident, or to be fraudulently included as a dependent on an application. There is no absolutely objective test that can be applied in such cases, so officers end up balancing the evidence available to them and using that evidence to reach a decision on the application.

While never determinative on their own, a combination of factors such as age differences, lack of familiarity with one's spouse, inconsistencies in their respective narratives, and linguistic and cultural differences may all be taken into account. Visa officers have a legal responsibility under the act to undertake a thorough review of each case they assess and to ensure that applicants have demonstrated they meet the legal requirements in the category in which they have applied.

Officers are also required to follow the guidance of the Federal Court of Canada every time they make a decision on an application. Federal Court jurisprudence requires, for example, that decision-makers apply the correct standard of proof when making a decision and that they comprehensively document any finding that an application does not meet legislative requirements. For this reason, it is usually much more time consuming to refuse a case than to accept it. It is necessary first to comprehensively assess the evidence, seek more evidence if necessary, and then use all of this evidence to render a decision which is in accordance with the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and which meets the decision-making standards established by the Federal Court.

In both the Dominican Republic and Cuba, we have also observed what can be described as "holiday romance" types of relationships where Canadian citizens, male or female, develop a relationship with a local resident during a one or two-week vacation. These applicants often have jobs related to tourism at the time of meeting the Canadian sponsor. In these cases, there is often a significant age gap, ranging from 10 to 50 years, typically with an older Canadian sponsor and a much younger applicant. We have seen many cases where the intent of the applicant is to take advantage of the sponsor to gain access to Canada. These cases can be difficult for us, as often the sponsor is genuinely committed to the relationship while the applicant is not.

As mentioned by Mr. GiraIt, another complexity in the processing of family reunification applications relates to admissibility concerns. Many of the applicants in this region have previously resided in Canada or the U.S. and, as part of the application process, are required to submit police certificates. These police certificates often reveal past criminal activities. The information-sharing agreement that Canada has with the U.S. also alerts us to past criminal activity by individual applicants and also reveals previous immigration violations in the US. This information is invaluable to us in ensuring the integrity of our processes, but also adds to the complexity and time required to review these applications.

I know that we have only managed to scratch the surface, but I hope that this has been a useful overview. We would be pleased to answer any questions that the committee might have.

8:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj

Merci.

Ms. Dzerowicz, seven minutes please.

8:20 a.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Good morning and good afternoon to everyone. Thank you for the excellent presentations. I was fearful this morning that I might not have any questions, but after the presentations, I have many. I hope I can get through them in the next seven minutes.

I'm going to start off with you, Ms. Chomyn. You had mentioned that most applications are approved rapidly. Can you define what rapidly is? What are the service standards? By extension, to Mr. Giralt and Monsieur Jacques, I would like to understand whether the service standards are the same in all three parts of the world.

8:20 a.m.

Area Director, North Europe and the Gulf, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Sharon Chomyn

The department has established service standards for the entire network, and we aim to complete 80% of family class applications within 12 months of the original application by the sponsor.

8:20 a.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Is that happening? You aim to do that, but is it happening?

8:20 a.m.

Area Director, North Europe and the Gulf, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Sharon Chomyn

We're within departmental standards for the family reunification program that was transferred to us from Pakistan. In the early days, it took us a bit of time to gain traction and to complete the knowledge transfer that we had to put into place to make sure we understood the cases and weren't unnecessarily calling people to interview or belabouring the applicants in any way. Now we're at a point where we are within the departmental standards.

8:20 a.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Giralt and Monsieur Jacques, is that the same case for both of you, where 80% of all the family reunification cases are completed within 12 months?

8:20 a.m.

Area Director, United States and Caribbean, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Mark Giralt

My comment would be that with the increases in targets within the family class in recent years and last year, it's really given us a bit of extra room within those targets. One of the effects of that, as we finalize more cases, is that sometimes the processing times at the initial stages will extend while we dig down through some of the older cases. There's a dip, and the processing times will show improvement, and we really are improving in the offices I'm responsible for in Kingston. Port of Spain is well below that target, and Port-au-Prince is doing well. It's very helpful.

Additional resources have allowed the department to send us more temporary duty officers to help alleviate some of the decision-making burdens, and we're able to do more interviews. We've had some very successful sessions. For example, in Kingston, we've been able to finalize a lot more cases because of those additional decision-making resources either taking on those types of cases or sometimes just allowing the locally engaged officers to make those decisions.

8:25 a.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Thank you.

Mr. Jacques, do you have anything to add?

8:25 a.m.

Area Director, Latin America, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Olivier Jacques

As Madam Chomyn mentioned, we applied the 12-month service standard here in Mexico, which is the same across the network. In Mexico City—and I'm talking about Mexican citizens residing in Mexico—our processing time is around 16 months. We're not quite there yet, but we are very confident that we will get there in 12 months. We're working very hard, I can assure you, to process these applications within the departmental standard of 12 months because of additional resources that have been given by the department. It allows us to receive some temporary duty officers. By reviewing our processes, and with the level space that has been given by the government, we are hopeful that we will be able to reach the 12 months quite soon.

8:25 a.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

My next question is about third party providers. In the whole processing of the family reunifications, are third parties used? For example, it could be for security, or it could be for medical. The reason I ask is that in some of the cases where I'm waiting, and someone is taking five or six years, I'm being told they're waiting for a security check to be cleared, and it takes a year and a half.

If you could maybe talk a bit about third party providers, what part of the process do they cover? Are they subject to service standards, as well, and if they are, then what are they?

Maybe we'll start with you, Ms. Chomyn.

8:25 a.m.

Area Director, North Europe and the Gulf, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Sharon Chomyn

We aren't able to comment on specific cases. There may be a unique set of circumstances in the case you're referring to that caused the case to have taken longer than normal. When it comes to matters of security screening, we work together with our colleagues at the Canada Border Services Agency to complete the assessments that have to be done under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

If you're talking about service providers in general, I wonder if you may be referring to, for example, language testing organizations that were used in economic cases. Perhaps I'm going off on a tangent, and you're interested more specifically in the family class.

8:25 a.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

We're talking about family class reunification. To me it's the whole process that allows a spouse, a child, or another family member like a grandparent to be accepted. Are there any third parties that we use as part of that process for approval, and if so, are they subject to service standards?

8:25 a.m.

Area Director, North Europe and the Gulf, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Sharon Chomyn

I'll start off, and I'll invite my colleagues to weigh in. As I mentioned, we work with the Canada Border Services Agency. We use panel physicians to complete the medical processing that's required for all of these sponsored cases. They are subject to service standards as well. That process is administered by a different part of the department than I am responsible for.

I should note that the RCMP is another agency that we engage as part of the screening process for adults.

I'll ask my colleagues now if they can suggest any others.

8:25 a.m.

Area Director, United States and Caribbean, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Mark Giralt

I'll take up the topic. Something I have been thinking quite a bit about is our processing of adoptions, both for permanent residents and for citizenship. Often, in many countries, especially those that are signatories to the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, the local adoption process generally happens within our processing time, so sponsors in Canada, especially if they have an unnamed child for adoption, will start the sponsorship process before they have actually identified a client.

We have fewer that two dozen adoption cases in Port-au-Prince right now, and about four or five of them are unnamed, so there's no actual individual attached to them. Those cases are waiting for the adoption process to take place within that window of processing time. That's something we don't control.

8:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj

Thank you, Mr. Giralt.

Mr. Tilson, you have seven minutes, please.

8:25 a.m.

Conservative

David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We've been talking about processes, and some of the witnesses who have come to the committee thus far have said that the application system that Canada has is flawed. An applicant must submit their information multiple times, essentially opening a new file as they approach the department, be it as a visitor or for a visa, sponsorship, or residency. It has also been suggested that a better model could be used by the CRA.

Starting with Monsieur Jacques, because you did get into the topic of centralization, can you suggest a model that could be used and would be better than what we have?

8:30 a.m.

Area Director, Latin America, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Olivier Jacques

I believe that the model that we have is a solid model at this point. What we've done here in Mexico is to centralize some of our operations from the region in order to gain efficiencies.

A few years ago we started to process all the applications from the Dominican Republic, as well as from Venezuela, and Central America. By having a significant team here in Mexico we have an economy of scale in reviewing these applications, and I believe we can eventually provide a faster processing time.

If possible, we try to avoid delaying the application, and we waive the requirement for an interview if the applicant provides sufficient documentation that satisfies us as visa officers in proving that the relationship is genuine.

8:30 a.m.

Conservative

David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Mr. Jacques, may I interrupt just for a second? The reason these comments have been made is because the big concern that has come before the committee is that the delays are unreasonable. That's what a number of witnesses have told us. We're trying to figure out what we can recommend to the government and how these delays can be shortened.

One suggestion was that there be a new model. You're saying that the model is adequate. Is that what you're saying?

8:30 a.m.

Area Director, Latin America, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Olivier Jacques

Yes, I believe it's adequate at this point.