Evidence of meeting #4 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was applications.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:40 p.m.
The Clerk
Madam Chair, I'm looking into it now. It might have been an Internet freeze in the connection, but please proceed.
3:40 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Thank you very much, Ms. Valois. I think the answer was yes.
I'm going to turn quickly to a different topic. For the people who are already here—migrant workers, as well as students—there was some talk about express entry. The government actually made a provision; the angels program for health care workers was applied. Should we not do the same for other migrant workers who are supporting Canadians, Mr. Waldman?
3:45 p.m.
Lawyer, Waldman & Associates, As an Individual
Absolutely. We should expand the program, as I said in my opening remarks, to all persons in Canada. That's the only way we're going meet our quota in 2021, and it's the humane response.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Thank you, Mr. Waldman.
The time is up. We will now move on to our second round of questioning.
Mr. Saroya, the floor is yours. You have five minutes for your round of questioning.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Bob Saroya Conservative Markham—Unionville, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to all of our witnesses. They bring us a ton of wealth. I counted about 60 years of experience around this table, and I am looking forward to some of their guidance on this immigration file.
First, I would like to talk about family reunification. As you know, some of the biggest issues we have in our ridings are the immigration inquiries and immigration issues. I have two full-time people working on the immigration files, and it's still not enough.
One topic I'll talk about is what happened yesterday. Somebody came to see me, and his parents' application has been outstanding since 2013. Somebody called me last night from B.C. about a spousal application for his wife, which has now been outstanding for four years. Somebody called me earlier this morning to talk about a spousal application sent on March 18, 2020. They hadn't heard back. Can any of the witnesses guide us as to what can and should be done? When I came here in the seventies, this was a compassionate and wonderful country. What has happened to us? What do we need to do to be the old Canada and the beautiful country we have?
I have another question on the students as well. I'm hoping that I'll get another minute and a half to ask a second question. Thank you.
Anybody can take this, starting with Mr. Waldman, Mr. Sharma or anybody else.
3:45 p.m.
Lawyer, Waldman & Associates, As an Individual
I understand your concerns. We see lots of very significant delays in the processing of applications, and that situation has only been exacerbated by what's happening with COVID.
People have talked for years about the need for some kind of ombudsperson to be able to take complaints and respond, because, really, when someone comes to me and they have a delay, all I can do is write a letter, and it goes into a black box somewhere. We don't know who's going to respond or if there's going to be a response. The only other option is going to the courts, which, as one of the previous witnesses said, is like a hammer to solve a problem.
I think the government needs to consider the possibility of creating some kind of ombudsperson who could receive complaints when there are these unreasonable delays in processing of applications, and who could ensure there's a quick response so that it doesn't fall only on members of Parliament to be doing that work. Basically what happens is that I send my clients to you, because you're the best way to get a response.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Bob Saroya Conservative Markham—Unionville, ON
If I can say this, COVID started that month, and the applications I'm talking about are from 2013 and 2012. If you see two people working full-time.... By the way, for the 2013 application, I checked with the ministry over and over again and got the same recycled answer.
Mr. Sharma, do you want to add something, please?
3:45 p.m.
Managing Partner, Stewart Sharma Harsanyi, As an Individual
I agree with Mr. Waldman that perhaps an ombudsman is what's required. I don't think MP resources should be utilized to do status checks.
With regard to what Mr. Waldman's reference to the court, that's called a mandamus application. Our office probably files about 50 or more mandamus applications per year. Again, that is a very, very harsh use, and a disproportionate use, of court time just to move a file along. I mean, these individuals have paid their fees. They've put in a complete application. They deserve an answer on their application.
Again, I don't think mandamus is appropriate. I don't think an MP office sending inquiries is appropriate. There has to be a third way.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Bob Saroya Conservative Markham—Unionville, ON
Would anyone from Montreal or Quebec City have anything to add on that?
3:45 p.m.
President, Association québécoise des avocats et avocates en droit de l’immigration
Yes. Thank you.
We used to have terrible delays. It got to be better in the outland sphere. We had 12 months inland. There was a big difference between where the file was filed, from Paris or from India. We used to have double delays, depending on the offices. We've gotten it to 12 months for all offices, but now we're going to 16 months and 17 months for some files. Of course, this has all been exacerbated.
This is only for the family class. In Quebec we speak about almost three years, or two and a half years, to process economic class applications. It's taking more and more time. It's more and more difficult for families.
Thank you.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Bob Saroya Conservative Markham—Unionville, ON
I have another question for you especially. Students get approved by the universities or schools or whatever. They get selected. They pay the fees. They buy the airline ticket. Then they get rejected by the immigration department or whoever rejects them. I've had tons of these calls in the last couple of years. Is there anything that you or anyone else can suggest to the government, when somebody is selected by a school—
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Mr. Saroya, your time is up. You already reached five minutes; maybe next time.
I just want to remind all members and witnesses to please direct their questions through the chair. Thank you.
Ms. Martinez Ferrada, the floor is yours for five minutes.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Soraya Martinez Ferrada Liberal Hochelaga, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
First of all, I'd like to thank all the witnesses for being with us today.
As you mentioned in your presentations, the pandemic has caused significant disruptions in the operations of the system, whether at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada offices or elsewhere in the world. To this day, some offices remain closed or are not operating at full capacity.
We continue to work with our partners to facilitate the safe resettlement of refugees. Among others, we are working with the UN Refugee Agency and the International Organization for Migration.
With a view to supporting activities within our borders, we have also made some changes at the Immigration and Refugee Board. In particular, we have worked with the IRB to resume in-person hearings using new virtual procedures. We have already started doing that, as you know.
We have also made some changes with respect to biometrics, for example. In addition, we have done a great deal of digitization in some areas. You mentioned a few of them as well.
Do you feel these changes to the processes are useful? I imagine that your answer will be yes. In your opinion, should we plan to make some of these adaptations permanent? What other adaptations should we do?
My questions are for Mr. Cliche-Rivard, Mr. Waldman and Mr. Sharma. I'd like brief responses from each of them.
3:50 p.m.
President, Association québécoise des avocats et avocates en droit de l’immigration
Thank you very much for your questions.
Some very good things have indeed been done in biometrics. Where I see a small issue right now is with the processing times for work permit applications from inside Canada, especially for refugee protection claimants. Right now, even though the application process is fully computerized, it takes six months to get an answer, whether you have implied status, you are having your status restored or you are waiting for a permit. It should be noted that when renewing a permit, both claimants and businesses have a hard time understanding the question of implied status. Because of this, people often lose their jobs. This should be addressed as a priority. We have no valid reason for taking six months to renew a work permit within Canada. That's the downside at the moment.
3:50 p.m.
Lawyer, Waldman & Associates, As an Individual
If I understood your question, I think we can focus on some of the positive things. As Mr. Sharma and I both said in our opening remarks, there's been a major move forward in digitalization. I think that's extremely positive, and I think that the more we move forward with that the better it will be. I would encourage the government to, as Mr. Sharma said, digitalize the entire process.
There are other innovations. For example, they're landing people without interviews now. There were things that were obvious that they didn't do because they felt that there was a need to see each person in person, but now they've done away with that.
I think the government needs to look at all the different steps of the process, determine what needs to be done and eliminate those steps in the process that don't need to be done in person and can be done through emails or through digital processes. That will make the system much more efficient and will benefit everybody. Most importantly, it will benefit the clients who suffer from the delays when processes have to be done in person or through interviews.
3:55 p.m.
Managing Partner, Stewart Sharma Harsanyi, As an Individual
From my point of view, I agree with Mr. Waldman in terms of innovations such as landing via email. You don't need to do that in person. Let's continue that. In terms of refugee notification eligibility, let's have whoever issues eligibility issue the work permit. There's no reason why refugee claimants should be waiting months to get a work permit out of an inland office.
Number two, for anyone who's here, such as these post-grad work permit holders, we are prejudicing their applications for permanent residence under the provincial nominee program because they don't have their status document. My own receptionist applied in June for a post-grad work permit and we still don't have it. We must prioritize individuals who are already here. This implied status is wreaking havoc on their lives and their access to health care coverage and—
3:55 p.m.
Managing Partner, Stewart Sharma Harsanyi, As an Individual
Again, it's common sense. Issue the work permit when there's a determination of eligibility for the refugee claimant inside Canada.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Soraya Martinez Ferrada Liberal Hochelaga, QC
Oh my God. Okay.
Last week, Minister Mendicino tabled a report indicating that 63,000 people who had temporary permits were granted permanent residence, which is an all-time record.
I would have liked to hear what the witnesses have to say about that.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Ms. Martinez Ferrada, your time is up. I'm sorry for interrupting, but your time is up.