Madam Chair and distinguished members of the committee, families have had to face a heart-wrenching reality since the pandemic began. Prolonged separation for indeterminate periods and the passage of time merely heighten the fear and suffering that families experience. I am here representing 8,000 individuals.
The announcement on June 8 was briefly celebrated, until we realized we were excluded from the announced measures. Although we had the option of filing temporary residence visa applications, those applications have gone unanswered or have been denied under paragraph 179(b) of the immigration and refugee protection regulations on the ground that we are inadmissible as a result of travel restrictions. Families have thus felt they are victims of discriminatory treatment because those who come from developed countries are allowed to enter Canada, but not others.
Then came the announcement on September 25, which promised that processing would be expedited and priority given to family reunification applications. We waited with cautious optimism for those promises to be kept. An important point in the announcement was that interviews via videoconference would be introduced. However, our members are still waiting for the government to deliver on those promises. In actual fact, waiting times for interviews often exceed 18 months. The interviews are urgently needed to accelerate family reunification and to limit travel during a pandemic.
Although travel is a problem, IRCC continues to require us to travel in order to complete medical examinations. This process must take place in the home country of sponsored persons. Where that is impossible, we propose that medical exams be conducted in Canada as a last resort and that a visitor visa suffice for that purpose.
Today, nearly nine months after the pandemic started, generic responses from IRCC, claiming COVID-19 as an excuse, are still the norm. What measures are taken are slow. If, as announced, 12,000 decisions have been reached since October, we would appreciate an explanation of the reasons why so many families have seen so little change in their cases.
In addition, on October 30, dual intent was underscored in an instruction from IRCC concerning the visitor visa. We have observed limited positive results, but the delays and waiting have lasted months. Many cases have also been denied. Although it is clearly stated that the applicant has an opportunity to address officers' concerns respecting the applicant's intent before his or her decision, very few of our members have been contacted.
The standards that frame paragraph 179(b) have been drafted in such a way that the applications of millions of Canadians would be denied. Applicants must own a house and a business and have a long travel history and thousands of dollars in savings. However, IRCC imposes these stiff requirements on applicants from developing countries, where economic conditions are often unfavourable. Do we characterize spouses from the United States or Europe during a visit in the same manner? The answer is no. This paragraph should be repealed.
The visitor visa as such has no clear protocol or directive and is highly discriminatory. For certain individuals, it is not an option. Consequently, we propose more economical and effective solutions.
In the short term, we propose that: criminal investigations be submitted with the initial file; biometrics be processed on arrival in Canada; visas should be issued electronically; and work visas should be issued at the port of entry.
In the long term, we propose that there be single window access to the IRCC site, which the representative and individuals may access with specific chronological file status, as well as online submission of permanent residence applications, with required original documents forwarded after the fact.
As we continue this study, we know that the findings and changes will take several months. During that time…