Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 27th, 2024

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

As you know and as I mentioned, the program filled up very quickly within the last three months.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

I'm going to turn it over to my colleague for one question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Mr. Kmiec, go ahead, please.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Mr. Chair, how much time do I have?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

You have three minutes.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Minister, in an exchange with one of the Liberal MPs, the question was asked about the paying of smugglers and bribes by certain people to get across the border.

You said in your response that you won't condone it, but you understand.

Are you aware that under the IRPA, paragraph 36(2)(c), committing an offence overseas that would be an offence in Canada makes a person ineligible to obtain a visa? It's an offence in Canada to pay human traffickers under Criminal Code section 279. Would those people then be denied a visa to come to Canada?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

That isn't the case, no.

We would perhaps ask additional questions, but you're again asking us to hold in judgment people who are trying to stay alive and safe.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Are you saying that paragraph 36(2)(c) will not apply to anyone who is paying a human smuggling network—a criminal network—to come to Canada, whether from Sudan, Gaza or anywhere else?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

You make a lot of presumptions about the paying of these amounts and who they went to in various shapes or forms.

This organization has been described as executive travel services or, in the context of this, quite usurious extortion of people looking to leave a desperate situation. I think that would depend on the circumstances at hand.

Again, would you deny them that right simply because they tried to save their lives by paying some money?

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Minister, you're speaking of a specific organization.

Are you speaking of Hala Consulting and Tourism?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Yes.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

I'm speaking more broadly, beyond just this particular organization, because I don't know exactly who they are.

They were mentioned in a Toronto Star article that has the title “'King of the Crossing'”, on the man selling a way out of Gaza. I'm talking more broadly of all criminal networks.

Are you saying that paragraph 36(2)(c) of the IRPA is in abeyance? Like, the department will not apply it? You're the minister. Are you saying you will not apply this particular section?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

I'm not saying that at all.

What I said is...I took a particular set of facts that you presented to me, refuted them and then you started to generalize about something that has nothing to do necessarily with the case at hand, so I'm asking you the question.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Minister, you're issuing visas. That is literally your job. You have a department to help you with that.

The IRPA, which was passed by Parliament, tells you that you cannot issue a visa to someone who has committed a criminal act outside of Canada—just committed the act, not convicted of the act. You're saying you're not going to apply the law.

I'm asking you a legal question. You are the minister responsible for the file. You've shown before in other questioning that you either don't know your file or you're not caught up on your file.

I'm asking you, will this particular section of the act apply, yes or no?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Honourable Minister, the time is up. You can respond briefly.

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

The legal answer is that we follow the IRPA.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you very much.

I will now go to Madam Kayabaga.

Madam Kayabaga, you have six minutes.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would just like to put on the record that as we are talking about the crossing at Rafah, it's really important to mention that today the news is that there is burning everywhere. Gazans are under fire. They're burning. They're dying. There are babies beheaded. The images are horrendous. I don't wish this upon anyone. I would hope that, in the right conscience, if the minister had to save a life, he would choose to save a life versus using some legal jargon that we are talking about here today.

Minister, you increased the cap from 1,000 to 5,000 today. Can you talk about whether this cap is per application or per person?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

In this case, it's per person.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Can you explain to us what the desired success is of this new 1,000 limit that you've set?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

The 5,000 limit? Well, we want to get those people out. We want them to be safe. We want them to take temporary refuge for the period in time covered by the policy, which is three years. Obviously, being flexible, the priority now is just to get them to safety.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Can you help us understand the relationship between the governments? Other colleagues have asked this. I have not heard the number of people who have been able to cross through the Rafah border. Now we're seeing that people are literally burning in these refugee camps. What is our relationship to be able to get things moving on this border?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Regardless of the views of the two governments that control the exit from Rafah in various situations, we owe it to the people we are trying to save to maintain diplomatic relationships and maintain lines of communication. Even when we disagree vehemently with some of the actions being taken, there's an understanding that our public statements do have an impact on the ability to deploy a policy like this at times. That's the reality of trying to save people in a war. That's the reality that we have to compose with.

Yes, I am in contact with the Israeli ambassador and with the Egyptian ambassador in particular. Our teams work together to coordinate this policy to the extent that it's accepted, and, when it is, to get people issued visas in a prompt fashion. For those who are in Cairo, we have a good working relationship with the Egyptian government to make sure that we can have visas for the people coming in to process visas, and then their co-operation to make sure that we can keep tracking people so that they can actually get to Canada once the visas are issued.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

This current special measure right now is for temporary residents. I heard previously that for other people, when it's permanent, it's permanent. They can stay. If it's temporary, I think someone in the room asked—it might have been my colleague Ms. Zahid—what the plan is for the people who come here through the TRV. If Canada's not playing a role in, or maybe doesn't have a future in playing a role in, bringing Gazans back to Gaza when they want to go back, what is the plan after? Is there a plan to extend as we have done for other measures—for Ukraine, for example?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

You're speaking specifically about the Gaza program. The Sudanese program is a permanent resident program.

The Gaza program was designed specifically as a temporary resident program for three years, not knowing what the outcome of this would be for a number of reasons. I think there are very important geopolitical considerations, particularly with some of the rhetoric around the emptying of Gaza and the perception that Canada would be participating in that. It's quite the contrary. We're participating in trying to save lives.

That is the reason principally that we did not make it permanent. Obviously, we're not sending anyone back to a war zone. Canadians would judge us quite severely if we even purported to do so.