Evidence of meeting #61 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 individuals.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Janet Altshool  Representative, LEGIT Vancouver
Kimahli Powell  Executive Director, Rainbow Railroad
Michael Tutthill  Executive Director, Rainbow Resource Centre
Maurice Tomlinson  Senior Policy Analyst, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network
Arsham Parsi  Executive Director, Iranian Railroad for Queer Refugees

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj

Thank you.

Mr. Tilson, you have seven minutes, please.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

I would like to thank both of you for giving very compelling stories of what's going on.

Mr. Tomlinson, I would particularly like to thank you for giving us this written material, which we will find very useful.

You raised a very interesting quandary that if, to get to Canada, you are identified as gay in this community, and then you want to go back to see a sick mom—and you've described the terrible stories that are going on in Jamaica—that's a problem.

We're talking about identifying people who want to come to this country because of the terrible situations they've been in, in their own countries. Yet, when they get here they're identified as such, and the label is put on them. Then they want to go home to terrible stories.

Have you any recommendations as to whether we should change our philosophy on how we deal with this issue?

4:50 p.m.

Senior Policy Analyst, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

Maurice Tomlinson

As I said, my situation is unique. I had resources. I have a security protocol when I return home to protect myself, so I can visit my mother.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

I doubt if.... It is unique.

4:50 p.m.

Senior Policy Analyst, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

Maurice Tomlinson

Exactly.

For those who don't have those resources and would like to reunite with their families or bring their families here, I would hope that it is easier for them to bring their families.

The fact is that, if they go home and they are identified and they have no security bubble or protection, they're vulnerable. Practically, the only thing I would think that can be done for them is to bring their families here.

I'm sorry if that's not a complete answer, but it's the only thing I can think of at this time.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

It raises the question...whether you have any suggestions with respect to how the UNHCR identifies refugees who are LGBTQ. As you have described, it can be, not just in Jamaica, but as Mr. Parsi has said, very dangerous in many places to be identified as LGBTQ at all. It is possible that the UNHCR may not even know that a refugee is gay and therefore, a potential target for the program.

To me, of all the witnesses, your testimony has raised all kinds of problems with respect to the identification of people. You have talked about this somewhat, but perhaps you can elaborate more.

4:50 p.m.

Senior Policy Analyst, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

Maurice Tomlinson

I'm not sure how we can assist persons if their identity, which is the basis of their claim, is not known or is not made known. I know there's an attempt to be very sensitive. I don't know a lot about the UNHCR process, but I know there's an attempt to be sensitive.

I've heard today that persons have suggested that the IRB reform is going in the right direction by not requiring too much detail as to a person's orientation or how they're identified back home, because that's hard to prove.

I believe that visibility is liberty. If a person is safe to be out in their community, they should try to be out because that helps to support others who might be vulnerable.

How do we protect them? One of the ways that I would propose is that we allow for in-country assessments of refugee claims instead of requiring persons to come to Canada to claim refugee status. Some persons can and should be allowed to be out in their home country and be allowed to flee from their home country, if they need to.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

We've heard from officials that those admitted under this pilot project fall within the overall immigration levels plan, that they have to take and split roughly fifty-fifty between the blended visa office-referred program and those identified directly by the Rainbow Refugee society.

We're going to be making recommendations to Parliament. I wonder if you can tell the committee whether there are any improvements that could be made regarding how we identify potential candidates. You've already stated one, but are there other recommendations?

4:55 p.m.

Senior Policy Analyst, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

Maurice Tomlinson

The way to identify persons or to verify persons who are LGBTQ is to address the recommendation I made here. A lot of the time, working with and supporting the local groups on the ground, who know the reality, can provide the kind of supporting evidence that you need.

Canada should reach out and continue to reach out to the groups on the ground who are working with LGBTQ people to ensure that...I've heard it mentioned before. You minimize false claims. That can be done through an engagement process with persons on the ground who are working with the individuals.

However, there might be some persons who have not been out. They just can't be out. They haven't been out, even to their own LGBTQ organizations.

As was said earlier, I doubt very much that, in that context, when persons finally come out, they are doing so without having counted the cost. It comes with a tremendous amount of risk. There's a loss. There are tremendous losses.

We should almost give the benefit of the doubt to persons who make that claim. In our context, it's a last-ditch effort. You have no other option.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj

You have 30 seconds.

4:55 p.m.

Executive Director, Iranian Railroad for Queer Refugees

Arsham Parsi

If I may, I'll have you know that in my experience most of the LGBTQ refugees who claim asylum, and mostly at the UNHCR, have no issue in declaring or identifying themselves as the LGBTQ community. The issue is when they apply on the basis of, for example, political affiliation or religion, but they are LGBTQ candidates—

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj

Ten seconds, please.

4:55 p.m.

Executive Director, Iranian Railroad for Queer Refugees

Arsham Parsi

It is very important and the UNHCR made a very strong recommendation. Canada can co-operate with the UNHCR in order to get referrals of more.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj

Thank you.

Ms. Kwan, seven minutes, please.

4:55 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Thank you to the witnesses for their presentations.

Am I assuming correctly, Mr. Tomlinson, that you would agree with the suggestions or recommendations that were put forward by Ms. Rempel a little bit earlier? In addition to that, to call on the government to do what is needed immediately for situations like the people in Chechnya are faced with?

Second to that, to bring in a special measure for those who are internally displaced, because right now there isn't a mechanism with respect to that, and that we do that above and beyond the current immigration level numbers?

Then last but not least, aside from supporting multi-year funding, stable funding for rainbow RAP, but also to expand that program, given the magnitude of the demand that is there and the fact that people's lives are literally at risk as this situation continues?

4:55 p.m.

Senior Policy Analyst, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

Maurice Tomlinson

The short answer is yes. I believe in relation to the internally displaced we especially need to have in-country processing for LGBTQ persons. Requiring people to flee to Canada almost requires them to be rich before they can be refugees. They have to prove that they have assets tying them to their home country and that they do not need to flee.

The catch-22 is that many people who are as vulnerable as I have described, especially if they are trans, will not be getting a stable job that will allow them to acquire those ties. Allowing in-country processing is one very important special measure that I would propose.

Yes, in many contexts, certainly in the Caribbean, the worst thing you can be is LGBT. There are parents who will say, “at least my child is not gay”, even if they are a murderer, “at least my child is not gay”. The worst insult that you can give to a person in Jamaica is to call them a “batiman”, which is the equivalent of faggot. We are the lowest on the totem pole and, therefore, I do agree that in the urgent situation we're facing now, a special measure would be appropriate. I think a specific one that might help would be in-country processing.

5 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Thank you very much.

I think you're exactly right, because I think the other issue as well is that those who are forced to leave their home country often find themselves in an even more precarious situation, because the nearby countries often share the same kind of laws and same kind of discriminatory approaches to the country from which they fled. Thank you for that.

You raise many interesting points, but there are two I want to particularly highlight. One is the issue you mentioned when you said you would not want to come as a refugee when you were outed because of the cessation provisions. If you travelled back to your home country of origin, you would be actually targeted and potentially lose your status. That's really a law that should be repealed. Am I correct in saying that, not just for yourself but for every refugee who travels back to their home country for whatever reason?

5 p.m.

Senior Policy Analyst, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

Maurice Tomlinson

I certainly would agree with that recommendation, yes.

5 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

The other point that you raise is around the medical inadmissibility. That is an absolutely excellent point because those provisions are discriminatory. They are discriminatory against people who have HIV/AIDS, discriminatory against people who have disabilities, for whatever reason. I wonder if you can elaborate on that a little bit and whether or not the government should actually recognize that law for what it is, that regulatory policy for what it is, and stop discriminating against people on the basis of those very basic human rights.

5 p.m.

Senior Policy Analyst, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

Maurice Tomlinson

I'm sure Erica has distributed the medical inadmissibility brief. I wasn't able to print it out for you, I'm sorry. The brief describes the challenges that the medical inadmissibility regime currently poses for persons who would, under normal circumstances, qualify as immigrants.

The medical inadmissibility regime currently says that the cap is $6,650 per year. This does not account for the fact that some people have access to private insurance; they come with their own resources, etc. If they were just allowed to be regular migrants, such people would not have to access the refugee process, which, as I've described, imposes a lot of onerous challenges on them and their families. That's one reason we think the medical inadmissibility process or regime needs to be repealed.

In addition, medical inadmissibility separates families, does not facilitate family reunification, and is not a process that is in line with immigration objectives, which are to secure the best quality migrants to Canada. We're in fact denying good quality migrants access to Canada.

5 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Thank you very much.

In essence, the medical inadmissibility provision is a discriminatory law. It discriminates against people who have a disability, and it discriminates against people from the LGBTQ community, particularly those who are at risk of HIV and AIDS. That's really what it is, and it is a law that should be done away with.

I want to focus in on this a bit. It's very important for us in terms of Canada doing important work in the global community, and particularly providing funding and support to organizations around the world that are working to defend and promote human rights, including those of LGBTQ+ people. This is a brief you have presented to us in the package, and I've also heard from other groups calling for that as well. Canada has shifted, with a lot of that money being focused on other areas. Should we be focusing and redirecting some of those dollars back to human rights advocates, particularly in this arena?

5:05 p.m.

Senior Policy Analyst, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

Maurice Tomlinson

I would say yes. The fact is, if advocates are able to address the human rights challenges in their home countries, this will stymie a lot of the ripple effect that we are in fact trying to cauterize. For example, if advocates in a country are able to campaign for equality, we would not have the need to find additional resources to support people who have to flee because of their refugee status. We need to be supporting the advocates in other countries, who are trying to do things like changing hearts and minds, challenging anti-gay laws, and confronting religious bigots. We need to be doing that so we don't have to end up spending the money at the back end.

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj

Thank you.

Ms. Dzerowics, you have seven minutes, and I understand you'll be splitting your time with Mr. Boissonnault.

May 15th, 2017 / 5:05 p.m.

Liberal

Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON

Actually, Mr. Boissonnault is going to go first, and I will take the rest of his time.

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj

Perfect.

Mr. Boissonnault.