Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2017

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

I'm also glad to see that the IRB has implemented a chairperson's guidelines on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression.

Could you update this committee on how these guidelines will help board members with the unique circumstances that vulnerable people from the LGBTQ community face?

[Greg Kipling]

I'll answer that question, Mr. Chair.

On May 1, 2017, our chairperson issued the guideline. We're very proud of that guideline. Essentially there are three objectives or goals of the guideline: first, to promote a greater understanding of the diversity and complexity of the situations of people with diverse sexual orientation and gender identity backgrounds; second, to establish guiding principles for our decision-makers in dealing with these cases; and last, to provide parties appearing before the IRB with an understanding of what to expect in terms of their treatment at the board when coming from these backgrounds.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

I come across this in my constituency cases every now and then, very rarely I will say. Some people who claim on the basis of LGBTQ and subsequently it appears that they may not be from that community and that they were using that as an asylum-seeking avenue. Does the IRB have methods or training to determine that, in a sensitive manner, without treating people in a very condescending or similar manner? Are they trained to decipher between those who are just using it as an excuse perhaps to gain entry into Canada versus those who are genuinely from those communities and are persecuted?

[Shereen Benzvy Miller]

That's a great question. One of the fundamental aspects of training for all members is credibility determination. As in any tribunal system, they are essentially looking for credibility of the claimant, and that is one of the primary focuses of our training. It applies to all aspects of the claim, not just sexual orientation or gender identity.

Do you want to add anything?

[Greg Kipling]

There was focus training delivered in the context of the rollout of this guideline, including addressing these sorts of issues that you were alluding to, questioning in a sensitive yet rigorous manner.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

This question is for IRCC. Do you know if those entering unofficial points of entry in Quebec are remaining in Quebec or moving elsewhere? Is there a method of tracking the initial movements of those people?

[Michael MacDonald]

Yes. We are starting now to track that. In fact that's one of the things we've been discussing with our provincial colleagues. I'm just looking for the actual table. We call it secondary migration. It has been extremely low.

That said, I do know that since we've been tracking we have fewer than 200 individuals from the Lacolle area—July, August, and September—going to Etobicoke or the greater Toronto area to our office to have their eligibility hearing taken care of. We have roughly 21 people overall heading into Alberta. Vancouver has around 30. Ottawa has 82, for example. It's not surprising with a francophone community and other diaspora communities. People are moving. They're free to move.

Largely the Lacolle movement has been primarily Haitian. Last week I talked a little about what we're hearing about the primary and secondary levels of education for children. Therefore, Montreal tends to be a natural place for parents to enrol their children in school. Quebec officials have informed me that they've already seen well over 1,000 kids enrolled in their school system alone this September, so it looks as if people are staying in Montreal.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

We had discussed here that there was an amnesty for Haitian and Zimbabwean claimants. That period has ended. Does the rationale behind that still affect those coming from Haiti, particularly with the destruction of Haiti, even if they're not genuine refugees or if we're not approving the claim, that they would not be able to be removed or sent back to Haiti? Is that still the case?

[Michael MacDonald]

The temporary suspension of removal was put in place by the Canadian government to respond to Haiti.... It was more or less the same event as the U.S. protection status. It was lifted with a series of amnesties—I'll use the word loosely—attached to it, where we encouraged people, we reached out to community organizations, and we thinned out and made our forms less complex for those individuals who had been here, had established themselves in communities like Montreal, Ottawa, or Toronto.

We allowed them to come into the humanitarian and compassionate application process. We very much worked with organizations to help people be aware, to show them how how to fill out the forms, and to reduce the size of the forms. That was extended several times. I don't know the exact uptake of individuals who went through the humanitarian and compassionate stream, but that was certainly something we did to encourage people, largely because people were telling us that they were well established in Canada and they just wanted to make sure that they could get on a pathway to permanent residency and maybe citizenship. That was designed to help them get on that path.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Mr. Saroya.

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

Ms. Miller, with regard to the legacy cases, you said that 50 cases have been decided. What were the outcomes? How many were accepted or rejected out of those 50 cases?

[Shereen Benzvy Miller]

I'm sorry. I do not have the data on the acceptance rate for legacy cases, but we can send that in.

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

Super.

Mr. MacDonald, help me out. I got a call this morning. Let's say somebody travelled from one country to Europe, and he wasn't successful in the immigration process, so he went back home. Then he came back with a different passport and came to Canada. What happens in this case if it comes to IRCC's attention? If a person has been travelling with two different passports in two different names and with two different dates of birth, what happens if you find out two or three years later?

[Michael MacDonald]

I apologize, sir. I'm not totally sure that I understand the question. I can talk about, generally, travel continuum and individuals—whether they require a visa or an eTA—but I don't think that's your question.

[Shereen Benzvy Miller]

He's talking about fraud.

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

Yes, I'm talking about somebody travelling under two different passports to two different countries. What will happen in this case if IRCC finds out?

[Michael MacDonald]

Typically, when someone arrives at a port of entry, there may be a flag in the CBSA port of entry system. The CBSA officer would then take the person to secondary and investigate. CBSA officers are well trained to pick up on indicators when they interview people at the booths or in what people say. That's one way to have that happen.

All that said, if IRCC becomes aware of someone who has entered into a pathway in the immigration system and there are questions about that person's genuineness, whether that person may have committed fraud, we can launch what's called a level one investigation, or we pass it over to our enforcement arm, the CBSA, which enters into a criminal investigation or what we call a level two investigation.

It all depends on the circumstances and where that person is in the immigration system or continuum. Then we can take the various means to look at the situation, but we always investigate first—or other parts of the government investigate first—to determine what's happening.

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

I'll just follow up on that one. Let's say somebody does immigrate, and you find out and it was proven that that person travelled on two different documents. What would happen in this case?

[Michael MacDonald]

It depends on the specifics of the circumstance. The CBSA could seek for that individual to be removed from the country. CBSA could contact the individual and inform them that they need to leave the country. It could go after the individual in terms of some level of prosecution, whatever that is. Obviously, we would put flags in our records for if that person ever reapplied in the future.

We would also look at that person's immigration status or immigration documentation, of which there are many types, as you know. For some documentation, we have the ability to withdraw that documentation. For others, there are more legalistic processes to follow. It would all depend on the situation and the seriousness of the action, offence, or misrepresentation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I just want to remind the members to try to keep within the scope of what we've invited our witnesses here for, which is the irregular crossings.

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

With regard to the Haitian refugees, the program was stopped. This is what we talked about a couple of meetings back. Where do we stand with those people? Of the Haitian refugees who came, about 3,000 or 3,500 people were still outstanding. Either they weren't successful, or they didn't apply for the temporary.... Whatever the reason, how many Haitian refugees are still outstanding? Do you have any update on that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I'm afraid I'm not going to be able to let you answer. The long preamble got in the way.

Mr. Tabbara, you have five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be splitting my time with Ms. Khalid.

My question is for the IRB.

In 2012, legislation was passed that created the backlog of the legacy cases, and as you know, it's ballooned since then. Our government has put in place measures to reduce all those legacy cases caused previously in 2012. Can you update the committee on the progress of reducing those legacy cases and where we're at today—

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I'm just going to interrupt for a moment. We'll allow this, but just to remind the members that the scope of our briefing today is on the irregular crossings. If you could tie that into the irregular crossings, it would be allowable. We'll give you a little leeway this time because I can tell they're very prepared; however, all members remember our purpose today is to give the witnesses a chance to be well prepared for what they're going to be asked.