Evidence of meeting #88 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 language.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Shannon Smith  As an Individual
Mohamed Al-Adeimi  Director, Newcomer Settlement Services, South London Neighbourhood Resource Centre
Omar Khoudeida  As an Individual
Rania Tabet  Services Manager, Interpretation and Translation Services, Cultural Interpretation Services for Our Communities
Benjamin Chacon  Executive Director, Interpretation Services, Cultural Interpretation Services for Our Communities
Lola Bendana  Director, Multi-Languages Corporation
Shauna Labman  Assistant Professor, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
Louisa Taylor  Director, Refugee 613

9:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant

I think that's very important. Thank you.

That ends our first panel. We'll take a moment's break, and then we'll go to the second one.

9:50 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant

I will call the meeting back to order.

We're going to begin with Ms. Bendana in Toronto, from Multi-Languages Corporation.

I don't know if you heard any of our first hour, but we've been on this topic now for a little while. We are talking about some of the language issues related to settling a community that has a non-widely disseminated language, and some of the difficulties in finding qualified interpreters to work with them. However, you can do whatever you want with us.

We'll begin for seven minutes with Ms. Bendana.

9:55 a.m.

Lola Bendana Director, Multi-Languages Corporation

Good morning, Mr. Chair, and honourable members. Thank you for inviting me to present to you about this very important topic.

Thank you to the interpreters who will be making sure our voice is heard in French as well.

Besides Multi-Languages, I have been working for the past 30 years with different non-profit organizations and associations that have created standards of practice, the language interpreter training program, and recently an accreditation system for community interpreters in Ontario, which is basically the base of professionalization.

Why do we want professional interpreters? Why is it important to support accreditation, training, and testing for interpreters?

I would like to start by sharing a very brief story that can actually clarify what I'm going to be sharing soon afterwards.

A man called 911, and the police arrived. He said his wife was acting crazy and that she was jumping up and down on her bed. The officer went into the room and saw that the woman was agitated and unable to tell her what was going on. The officer decided to call an interpreter, who introduced herself and reassured both parties that she would interpret accurately, and that everything would remain confidential.

Slowly the woman calmed down and, through the interpreter, the police found out that the woman had been brutally sexually assaulted. Her agitation was a result of her intense pain. They were able to get her medical help. The woman conveyed accurately that she felt safe doing so. This is the difference when you have professional interpreters.

There are countless examples of this difference. We see it on a daily basis in health care and the legal and social services fields. With high-needs refugee populations, if they receive the help they need in a timely manner from a professional interpreter, there will be less need for health care services, fewer mental health issues, and a lowering of costs in all levels of government.

As a background, as you can see from this very simple example, we know that language and cultural differences are among the main barriers to accessing public services in Canada where, as we know, more than 200 languages are spoken. We also understand that ethnocultural communities have a lower rate of participation in any public program. We understand the healthy immigrant effect with regard to language barriers, and that interpreters are basically a bridge to limit that language barrier. Therefore, contracting professional interpreters is essential to providing equal access to public services to all Canadians, especially in sensitive areas such as health care, legal settings, immigration, social services, settlement services, and so on.

I'll provide a little background on how we have worked over the last 25 to 30 years in Canada, and specifically in certain sections in Ontario.

Back in 2007, we published our “National Standard Guide for Community Interpreting Services”. This was a large milestone. These standards have been used nationally and internationally to create further certification for agencies and accreditation for community interpreters. We have language interpreting tests that are mainly used in Ontario but are also being used outside of the province. They're called the ILSAT and the CILISAT, and I believe you just learned about them in the previous session. Both exams actually evaluate the competencies of interpreters in terms of consecutive interpretation and sight translation. The tests are available in over 70 languages.

We also have a college program, which is post-secondary training that lasts 180 hours. It was implemented in 2006 and is now being offered in multiple colleges across Ontario. Currently it can be taken within one year. Originally it was designed for two years. There is also a program at York University, and it also takes one year.

One of the last initiatives I'll mention, which is more recent than the training and standards, is the accreditation of interpreters launched by the Ontario Council on Community Interpreting, or OCCI. OCCI is a multi-stakeholder council of organizations that represent the different sectors, such as interpreters, colleges and training institutions, purchasers of services, agencies, and so on. They developed this accreditation to set a benchmark and in response to the constant need for quality interpretation services in Canada. The ACI credential was created to support all languages that currently offer a language interpreting test.

There are several risks and costs that we know in not providing interpretation services at the professional level. Poor communication due to language barriers can leave organizations open to legal challenges, and can increase long-term health costs for newcomers and the health care sector. The social cost of unhealthy immigrants is very high: escalated health care costs, time off work, short and long-term disability, decreased productivity, unemployment, poverty, etc.

Given the adverse impact of poor interpretation on individuals with limited English proficiency, municipal, provincial, and federal governments may have a challenge in keeping their mandate to provide equal access to services to all Canadians, as guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canada Health Act, and Ontario's Human Rights Code.

Even though we have advanced by creating standards for training and accreditation, we still have several challenges to work with, such as the lack of funding to update the already 10-year-old curriculum and to support the ACI accreditation process. Interpreters working in community sectors basically have very poor working conditions, poor hourly rates, and so on.

There are several recommendations that our sector has come up with. First, support the accreditation. Second, support the language testing. Third, make sure that there is a collaboration between governments and the associations to advance the agenda of community interpreting as a profession rather than an occupation, and to ensure that a professional interpreter is provided every time the life of someone is on the line.

We would definitely like to see the support, and thank you for your time.

10 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant

That's very good, and it's exactly on seven minutes. I need to commend you.

We go now to Ms. Labman from the University of Manitoba.

10 a.m.

Shauna Labman Assistant Professor, University of Manitoba, As an Individual

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and honourable members, for the opportunity to appear before the committee.

I don't profess to be an expert on the Yazidi crisis or their particular resettlement to date in Canada. I view my role here today as providing a broader overview on the context of Canada's resettlement program linked to some of the witnesses you've heard so far, and I want to make three connected points.

One point relates to the settlement needs of the Yazidis, which might be heightened, but they are representative of challenges faced by all newly arrived refugees. The second is that the response to date seems to be relatively an ad hoc privatization of that support by volunteer groups here in Canada. The connection of this to private sponsorship needs to be addressed. Finally, it's important to ensure that there is a global focus of Canada's resettlement program.

In reviewing the issues raised to the committee by other witnesses, these are issues that you've talked about this morning in terms of translation. Connection to the Yazidi community already in Canada, housing, delay in child benefit payments, case worker overload, and trauma support are challenges and issues that need to be addressed for all arriving refugees.

None of these issues is unique to Yazidi refugees, and they're a challenging component of resettlement. What the witnesses made apparent to me is the degree to which the government resettlement is dependent on Canadian volunteer support. One Free World International's brief noted that they're working to “bridge the gap in services” in Toronto. The work of both Project Abraham, also in the GTA, and Operation Ezra in Winnipeg seem to confirm this gap-filling need.

For me, while commending the amazing work of these organizations, it does raise concerns where volunteer gap fillers are not present. Even with Operation Ezra in Winnipeg, which I'm more familiar with, and the phenomenal work they are doing, the consequence is very differential treatment and support of Yazidi refugees they are working with than refugees, both government and privately sponsored, from from other regions arriving in our community.

The result is an ad hoc and differential treatment of resettled refugees under both the government and privately sponsored programs, as well as the blended visa office-referred program. Project Abraham's plea for the government to “make use of us” needs to be structured in a way that supports are not contingent on location or the strength and organization of this volunteer capacity.

One option here, I think, is a broader examination of the expansion and promotion of the joint assistance program. Project Abraham noted that they were struggling to access the JAS program. When individuals at Operation Ezra, already assisting 12 government-assisted refugee families, noted to me that they were advocating for a hybrid model of GAR support, I likewise raised the issue of the JAS program, which had not been immediately apparent to them.

The second point to make here is that these initiatives are illustrating a privatization of settlement support by Canadian volunteers. There's a connection to this, as it moves beyond private sponsorship. I think this is significant, particularly given the shifts in focus between government and private sponsorship already happening in Canada's resettlement program.

In the last few years we've seen private sponsorship at higher numbers than government resettlement refugees, which is a reversal from past years. In the projection for the immigration levels for the incoming three years, we see private sponsorship numbers at more than double the government-assisted refugees. Given these increased numbers to private sponsorship moving forward, it's important to recognize the pull of privatized Canadian support and to assess what this may do to the gap-filling capacity of private Canadians, as has been articulated with respect to the Yazidi refugees and their settlement.

It's also very likely that the so-called echo effect will play out here as resettled Yazidi refugees work to bring over their extended families and friends. You have heard indications of this from previous witnesses. Operation Ezra made note of the need for more sponsorship agreement holder spots for Yazidis, and other witnesses commented on the need to facilitate family reunification. This will most commonly occur through private sponsorship, although UNHCR has indicated it's receiving names directly from Canadian NGOs which would funnel into the GAR program. Thus, while only 60 Yazidis have come through PSR, these numbers are likely to increase.

Finally, as my third point, I want to reiterate comments you heard by the UNHCR representative.

The UNHCR has 17.2 million refugees under its mandate, and 189,000 were resettled in 2016. The UNHCR's 2018 projected global resettlement need is 1.2 million persons. Syrians compose 40% of this need, followed by the Democratic Republic of the Congo, at 12%, and the Central African Republic at 8%. Africa is the region with the highest resettlement needs, with over half a million refugees in need of resettlement from 34 different countries.

Meanwhile, the UNHCR has seen significant drops in resettlement commitments from the United States and some European states. While there is at times a need to focus on regions or groups in particular need, it's incumbent on Canada to maintain a global resettlement plan that relies on UNHCR needs prioritization to select those refugees most in need of resettlement.

It's important to note here that privately sponsored refugees do not necessarily come through UNHCR referrals, nor do they fall into these criteria-based selections.

Thank you for the invitation to appear today. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant

Thank you very much.

Ms. Taylor.

10:05 a.m.

Louisa Taylor Director, Refugee 613

Thank you for the invitation to speak to you today, Mr. Chairman, and honourable members.

Like the previous speaker, I am here not as an expert on the Yazidi community. As far as I know, in Ottawa, we have received very few, if any Yazidi community members. I'm here as someone representing the thousands of community members across Canada, particularly here in Ottawa, who have mobilized to welcome refugees particularly since the Syrian resettlement project.

Refugee 613 was created in 2015 in direct response to the overwhelming public interest in supporting refugees. The Syrians brought us together, we like to say, but we're here for refugees from all countries. The existing settlement infrastructure designed to serve newcomers was not ready for the overwhelming public interest in sponsoring, donating, and volunteering with the Syrian refugees. There were gaps in communication and information that made it hard for the public to know how they could get involved, get involved in a safe way, and to be connected and understand their role.

This is where we come in as Refugee 613. We don't provide front-line service, but we support the people who do, with information, connection, and mobilization tools. That's everything from newsletters to convening tables; social media; making presentations in schools, in public arenas; helping anyone who wants to support refugees to connect with the resources and the partners to help them do it. We were created by a network in Ottawa of refugee resettlement agencies, school boards, food banks, city hall, and individuals acting in support of refugees.

We believe that welcoming refugees makes a community stronger, and a more informed community is a more welcoming community. We welcome refugees because we know they bring new skills and perspectives and are the citizens of the future, but also because refugee resettlement creates opportunities for Canadians to work together in collective action. Because of the Syrian project, we know that neighbours know each other better, know the city better, know organizations better, and also know more about the rest of the world. In addition to the obvious humanitarian impulse to welcome refugees, we see it as a community-building approach.

The key is to ensure everyone feels at home, including our newest residents. How do you create that with a population like the Yazidis, who have experienced so much trauma? As the previous speaker noted, and others as well, it's a highly vulnerable population. However, we also know that Canada has received very vulnerable populations before, and they have the same challenges, to a different degree. Language, housing, interpretation, social connection are all challenges that refugees, no matter where they come from, are vulnerable to.

We believe it's really important to prioritize letting the community set their agenda in many ways, give them a voice, and listen to them. Obviously, with this population, it's important to invest in mental health support, but I would say mental health investment is important for every category of refugee. To be dislocated from your home against your will is a trauma, no matter what. It's something that we've seen particularly in the Syrian population. We need to invest in creative and flexible mental health support that can get over the cultural stigma of seeking out support. We know that money spent now will protect precious lives in the future.

We also think it's important to understand and accommodate the full diversity of the population. Not everyone will approach integration the same way and have the same challenges, so it's important to avoid investing in cookie-cutter programming that locks clients into a specific pathway.

I was listening to the earlier panel and wanted to underline the importance of investing in developing best practices from settlement professionals on the ground, and community members, and helping them share across the communities where the Yazidis are being settled.

Canadians want to help, and this impulse is the root of social integration. However, we learned very clearly with the Syrian project that volunteer help is not always needed, or it's not always offered in the best way or channelled in the best way. We believe it's important to take advantage of that energy and to train people, and it's extremely important in the case of a sensitive population like the Yazidis.

We believe it's important to invest in programs that give receiving communities the tools and support to develop relationships with the newcomers. Fund volunteer matching programs that train volunteers in trauma care and culturally appropriate behaviour, match them with newcomer families, and support them to nurture healthy relationships. That's how you build belonging and you build a second chance at life.

Another way to do that is to invest in information to help the receiving community better understand the newcomers. We heard an example earlier of a young girl in Calgary feeling pushed between two groups. If you can, do some quiet, well-informed, targeted education for those working with these groups in schools—medical staff, service providers. Don't assume that all settlement staff will understand this group. They won't have worked with them before, and they need education too. It will make their experience of integrating that much easier.

To sum up, I would definitely echo what has been said before in terms of the levels plan and making the Yazidis a category above and beyond current levels. Anyone working with refugees is concerned about the government's levels of government-assisted refugees in the next three years and the reliance on private sponsorship. We work with private sponsors a lot. We have great faith in them. We believe it's a tremendous vehicle and a global innovation, but they're not the only answer to sponsorship and they need more support.

Just last month, I had the good fortune to travel to Europe, attend conferences, and meet with European civil society leaders. Very often, all we hear from Europe is about the xenophobes. It was amazing to be in rooms full of European civil society leaders who are working hard to welcome refugees, and to see how much work they're doing. They are still looking to us in Canada to show global leadership. They are still looking to us to share our best practices, to connect with them, give them ideas, give them moral support, and to show the example that we cannot leave our vulnerable neighbours to suffer.

Now is not the time to slow down or lowball our efforts. I believe that we should continue to commit to supporting the Yazidi community, and other vulnerable communities, as previous speakers have noted, around the world who are also suffering.

I'll stop there.

10:15 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant

Thank you very much.

Mr. Anandasangaree.

10:15 a.m.

Liberal

Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank the panel for being here.

I want to step back for a second and pick up on the comments by Professor Labman.

You indicated—and I think this is also reflected in your statement, Ms. Taylor—that there are 1.2 million refugees requiring resettlement in 2018.

One difficult question is on how you prioritize. How would you advise the government to prioritize both GARs and, to a lesser extent, privately sponsored refugees, given the number of conflicts out there that are at catastrophic levels? There are things happening in Myanmar, in Bangladesh. You indicated the number of African countries where conflict has resulted in millions of refugees.

What framework would you use to assess and prioritize how Canada should engage in bringing in refugees?

10:15 a.m.

Assistant Professor, University of Manitoba, As an Individual

Shauna Labman

In my previous life, I worked for UNHCR as a consultant in Delhi. The UNHCR has resettlement criteria. They funnel in those with needs. I think one thing to recognize is that the UNHCR is doing needs-based assessment out of their global population of refugees into those in resettlement need. They're already categorizing who has needs, based on legal and physical protection needs, survivors of violence and torture, medical needs, women at risk, and so forth.

Our government program of resettlement relies on those UNHCR referrals; our private sponsorship program does not necessarily. There have been moves in recent years to somewhat contain that with the blended visa-office referred program, with limitations to groups of five needing to resettle recognized refugees.

However, the broader scope of private sponsorship tends to be extended family reunification or community-based. That's the echo effect, that these Yazidis we're now bringing in are going to have others in their communities who they'll want to bring, and the people who those individuals want to bring are not necessarily going to be within the parameters of UNHCR's criteria.

What private sponsorship does beautifully is it gives that expanded valve to bring in more, above and beyond, in complement. But what we're seeing, and I think this is problematic, is an increasing overreliance on private sponsorship to do the majority of our refugee selection, and we're losing focus on that needs-based criteria.

10:15 a.m.

Liberal

Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON

Then I guess, just to pick up on that, how would you...? One thing that UNHCR doesn't do is categorize people by ethnicity or by religion, as far as we're told. How would you micro-target areas of vulnerability and be able to target refugees, the Yazidis, for example? It's not a group that UNHCR has typically categorized as a group.

10:20 a.m.

Assistant Professor, University of Manitoba, As an Individual

Shauna Labman

My understanding of that, the Yazidi population for Canada's particularized interest, is that Canada worked with UNHCR to target this group, but this is outside of UNHCR's typical norm. As was said by the previous speaker, I do think it is an approach to approach these particularized groups as being above and beyond our current resettlement quotas or targets and ambitions. When you are moving into those groups, you're basing it on a desire within the Canadian public, a particularized protection need that is absolutely there. But if that is outside the realm of what our government resettlement is, reliant on UNHCR's actual needs assessment, that should be a differential category. We should separate that out.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON

Okay.

Ms. Taylor, would you like to comment on that?

10:20 a.m.

Director, Refugee 613

Louisa Taylor

No, I think she covered it.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON

Moving on to our longer-term view in the next few years, when the next crisis hits and we have a highly vulnerable population, how would you like the government to react? Is there a particular outlet or engagement that we need to do to have an alert system where we're automatically reacting to situations with refugee resettlement?

10:20 a.m.

Assistant Professor, University of Manitoba, As an Individual

Shauna Labman

Is this question for me?

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON

Yes.

10:20 a.m.

Assistant Professor, University of Manitoba, As an Individual

Shauna Labman

I think we saw this with the Syrian crisis, particularly in 2015-16, when the recognition was there, and the government acted swiftly. There was lots of messaging from the United Nations prior to that that arguably we could have acted much more quickly. That's not in my realm of expertise in any way, but I think it's a matter of being responsive to messaging from the global community.

Private sponsors are, in fact, sometimes closer to the pulse on the ground of protection needs. Having that valve through private sponsorship does work well for those sort of immediate protection needs. It's just having a government that is responsive to both global messaging, geo-messaging, and the Canadian public's messaging on protection importance.

10:20 a.m.

Director, Refugee 613

Louisa Taylor

I'll just add to that.

We've learned a lot in the last two years about the importance of good communication channels and of good information. It's really important for a government to get out in front of an issue, to explain to people who the population is and why it's important to continue to welcome them. Keeping good information out there fosters healthy public discourse, and it's really, really valuable.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON

I think I have about 30 seconds left.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant

You do.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON

With respect to language support, interpretation support, once an individual or a family is here, what is a reasonable time frame for government support to exist for the transition?

10:20 a.m.

Director, Multi-Languages Corporation

Lola Bendana

Could you expand a little bit more about what you mean by government support?

One of the points that was mentioned was that, without communication, there is no integration for these refugees. There is no way you can provide health care services or welcoming services without language access.

Now the point is, how do we train in these emerging languages? That is the main question. We may have enough interpreters for the major languages, languages that are established in Canada, because they have been training for many years.

In terms of the time frame, what exactly are you looking for? Do you want a fully accredited interpreter, or do you want express training? That is something that is already being tried by some non-profit organizations working with refugees right now in terms of providing some emergency training or express training for these emerging languages.

Instead of waiting the full one year that the regular training will take, they can do it faster, like maybe in a two- or three-month period. For the full training, to keep the level of standardization that we want, we have to make sure that the people who are trained are capable of doing the job at the level that we want.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant

I'm afraid I need to interrupt you there. We've just come to the end of Mr. Anandasangaree's time.

Mr. Kmiec.

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to start with Refugee 613, and I want to bring it back to the update on the resettlement of Yazidi people and girls.

When I came to Canada, I didn't speak French or English and I started school five months later. It was quick. You had to pick it up really quickly just to get started. The previous witnesses who came here mentioned a lady, Gule, whom I met in Calgary. She explained to me the difficulties she had in getting the right services, but her problems, and I think for all the Yazidi population, are a bit broader. You mentioned communication.

When the government decided to bring in tens of thousands of refugees from the region, and then specifically Yazidis, in my view they should have forecast that they would need interpreters who were comfortable in Kermanji, but also Sorani, Zaza, Gorani, or the languages of the region. They should have understood that there are different dialects of the Kurdish language that are spoken differently depending on where you are from. Then they should have communicated that.

You mentioned communication and how important that is for volunteer organizations on the ground. Government can't do everything, and in my experience—and I've been to Calgary; I've been to Operation Ezra in Winnipeg, and I've been to Toronto—there was very little communication even with the different Kurdish community associations in the different cities.

What communications do you have with those community groups to find...? Maybe they're not qualified interpreters, but they could maybe bridge that gap for the first few weeks. They can maybe help you understand where the refugees are from, what they need, and what types of services they're looking for. Do you communicate with Kurdish associations and Kurdish groups on the ground on an ad hoc basis, or do you have some type of fixed operation?