Evidence of meeting #5 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 minutes.
A recording is available from Parliament.
6 p.m.
Conservative
Jasraj Singh Hallan Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
Thank you for that, Mr. Shory.
I also wanted to ask you about the spousal sponsorship program, which has been criticized for its delays—even prior to the pandemic—for the past five years. Some people are in very vulnerable positions. Would you like to share what you would recommend to this government in order to address some of these really impactful delays on spousal sponsorships?
6 p.m.
Lawyer, Shory Law, As an Individual
Sure. I think that being more transparent with the applicants or their authorized representative helps. The number of times we've emailed—
6 p.m.
Liberal
6 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Now we will move on to Ms. Martinez Ferrada.
Ms. Martinez Ferrada, you have four minutes.
November 16th, 2020 / 6 p.m.
Liberal
Soraya Martinez Ferrada Liberal Hochelaga, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'll do this in English so that we can probably do this better, because I think we have an issue with translation.
My first question will be for Mr. Shory.
Could you give us your opinion on the dual intent instructions given to the visa officers, which we did two weeks ago? Can you tell us how you think the system will respond to these updates? I think it will be something that Ms. Bergeron will also be interested in. Please keep it short so that I can ask a question of Mr. Falconer after that.
Thank you.
6 p.m.
Lawyer, Shory Law, As an Individual
My short answer is that I'm not too sure what the expectation was in releasing those instructions, because, ultimately, dual intent has been in the law for quite some time now. If anything, for me as a lawyer, this further confirmed what I already knew in terms of how dual intent is assessed.
One of the questions asked is about your intention and whether you can prove that you can go back home or prove that you will go back home if your application for permanent residency is denied. There is nothing novel in bringing forward these delivery instructions. It's something that has existed for a long time.
I'll leave it at that.
6:05 p.m.
Liberal
Soraya Martinez Ferrada Liberal Hochelaga, QC
Okay, I hope you read the instructions we gave out two weeks ago.
Thank you again, all of you, for your testimony.
Ms. Bergeron, thank you for your presentation today. I'm glad to have heard it.
Mr. Falconer, one of the motivating factors in choosing these measures for Hong Kongers was that we saw the Hong Kong applications for work and study permits greatly increasing over time. The choices to strengthen those paths are already being used by Hong Kongers. As well as providing the choice to remain permanently, we are deliberating providing what we call parallel aid.
Are these additional ways you have seen Immigration taking action to help the people of Hong Kong? Are there other things you see that we should be doing?
6:05 p.m.
Research Associate, Immigration and Refugee Policy, School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, Alliance Canada Hong Kong
To be very short, I would look toward what we are doing internally here in Canada to help Hong Kongers and others who are currently in Canada who may be at risk of losing their status.
Currently, Canada only offers up to a three-year postgraduate work permit program. There is good reason to suggest that, given the current economic circumstances and the uncertain situation in Hong Kong, we might want to extend that to a five-year postgraduate work permit process, similar to the Australian model.
Two would be to adopt the interim visa policy of New Zealand. What that means is that currently, when somebody applies for an extension or change in their immigration status, if their current permit expires in the meantime, they are under what's called an implied status, meaning they are here in Canada with status but there isn't necessarily a clear record of that. In New Zealand, when somebody does that, the New Zealand government automatically issues them a paper interim permit that provides proof to their employer, proof to themselves, etc.
Those would be the ones I would look to here in Canada: the extension of the postgraduate work permit period and also to help them be able to find work that both sustains their livelihood and adds to their points for long-term eligibility for the economic immigration system, and as a last-ditch effort it also keeps the door open for our refugee claim system, should they feel the need to—
6:05 p.m.
Liberal
Soraya Martinez Ferrada Liberal Hochelaga, QC
I think we lost Mr. Falconer.
How much time do I have left, Madam Chair?
6:05 p.m.
Liberal
Soraya Martinez Ferrada Liberal Hochelaga, QC
Sorry, Mr. Falconer, we lost you there.
I wanted to have your thoughts about the package of measures we announced a couple of days ago, but we won't have time for your answer.
6:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
I'm sorry, but the time is up, so we'll have to end this.
Now we will move on to Ms. Normandin for two minutes.
6:05 p.m.
Bloc
Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Thank you.
My question is for Mr. Falconer.
I want to build on what Ms. Kwan had started to address.
I'll make a comparison. Carles Puigdemont, a Catalan elected official, didn't receive his electronic travel authorization because he was arrested for helping to organize a purely political referendum. People from Hong Kong can also be arrested for protesting a political issue, namely, the national security law.
I want to hear your comments, Mr. Falconer. Is there a concern that people in Hong Kong may not be able to receive their electronic travel authorization? Are the measures announced by the government to help the people currently in Hong Kong more symbolic than effective?
6:05 p.m.
Research Associate, Immigration and Refugee Policy, School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, Alliance Canada Hong Kong
That's the 2020 motto.
The answer to the first question is yes. For inadmissibility, the potential to be barred from Canada for participating in, let's say, a riot, which another government might call it, is absolutely a concern of the Hong Kong community. Many others in the world [Technical difficulty—Editor] are charged because their government deems their political activity to be in contravention of their laws.
That is one of the measures we consider more generally, that not all countries are going to have an equal interpretation of illegal political participation, whether in Hong Kong or elsewhere. We do have the precedent that we judge criminal activity based on our own activities, and activities that are happening in Hong Kong would not be held against them.
The second answer—
6:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
I'm sorry for interrupting, Mr. Falconer. Your time is up.
Now we will move to Ms. Kwan. With that, we will end the round of questioning.
Ms. Kwan, you have two minutes.
6:10 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm actually going to Mr. Shory for a minute.
We're talking about the dual intent issue and what was published on the website. My office actually phoned the ministerial enquiries division and spoke to an agent. He said he knows that it's essentially an internal memo issued by IRCC. It provides clarification to assist in interpreting dual intent, but is not considered an actual policy. It's a suggested practice and a guide to understand what dual intent is, but it is not there to help make a decision. Ultimately it's up to the officer to make the decision and to the applicant to still convince the officer that they will leave once the visa expires.
That's how I read that as well, and I think that's your understanding of it. If there's any interpretation or somehow there's a directive or policy from the government, I think it's incorrect.
Given that that is the case, and given Ms. Bergeron's experience and many like her who are stuck in the system and the government and the officer do not believe that their loved ones would actually return, what do you think the government should do? Should they suspend the use of 179(b), so that people can in fact bring their loved ones here? Should they also bring in a program or a special measure so that people can in fact bring their loved ones here to Canada?
6:10 p.m.
Lawyer, Shory Law, As an Individual
Thank you, Ms. Kwan, for that question.
To quickly respond to the member's previous question, I did get a chance to read the PDI on this, and I agree wholeheartedly with everything that you've said today. It is just a clarification of something that has existed for a very long time. There is nothing novel about dual intent that I saw in the PDI that was issued.
In terms of answering the second question, I know fiancé visas existed a long time ago. I don't know if that's a solution today. Understanding that we're in an unprecedented time, I don't see anything wrong with opening the door for things like spousal visas or TRVs.
In the same way—
6:10 p.m.
Liberal
6:10 p.m.
Conservative
6:10 p.m.
Conservative
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Can the committee allow Ms. Chan to submit her testimony to our study? I don't believe she was an official witness, so I would just like confirmation that she could do that.
6:10 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes, Ms. Dancho. Whose testimony did you want?