Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 7th, 2022

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

To follow up, would that be a reason that an independent ombudsperson should be put in place to review exactly those kinds of policies and their implications, to determine and root out discriminatory policies within IRCC?

[Marie Carmel Bien-Aimé]

I absolutely agree with your statement.

If there is an ombudsman office, the agent will be very careful in how they process applications because they know there's someone up there who will look at their work. Nobody likes to be reprimanded at work, so for sure everybody will be more careful, and their work will actually be done properly.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

In the meantime, while we wait for this process to be in place and for this thorough, and I hope independent, review to be done by an ombudsperson, should the government suspend the use of section 179(b)? Alternatively, should they not be allowed to reject TRV applications on the basis that they believe someone would not return to their country of origin unless there is a pattern of violations of immigration measures?

[Marie Carmel Bien-Aimé]

Absolutely. Right now the IRCC uses paragraph 179(b). It states that there will be a refusal if the processing officer doubts that the visitor will return to his or her home country within the visa period. The refusal is totally unfounded in the case of married couples. By attempting to stay in the country illegally, obviously, as I stated previously, they will jeopardize their application, and they don't want to do that.

We want the temporary visa because a foreign spouse from a visa-required country can come and live with their Canadian partners and children, just like spouses from visa-exempt countries, while the government continues to process the application. It won't clear the backlog, but at least these people would be together. Right now, under the current system, TRV applications from foreign spouses are systematically and categorically denied. My spouse was refused three times under all the rules of all the articles of paragraph 179(b).

We should definitely have the temporary visa.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much.

I would like to go to you, Ms. Douglas, on the issue around discriminatory policies within IRCC. I would like to touch on the caregivers program.

Caregivers are made to go through inordinate hoops while separated from their loved ones. One of the issues that was touched on in the last panel was around language requirements. The intended purpose of the language proficiency requirement for immigration is to help ensure that immigration applicants have the necessary language ability to transition successfully to a life in Canada.

Caregivers, having obtained their work permit here in Canada and working here in Canada already, have already proved that they have the language proficiency to do their jobs here in Canada. Why should they be made to do the language proficiency test requirement to pass level 5? Do you think the government should do away with that requirement?

[Debbie Douglas]

Absolutely. It is something that we have raised with the government in the past when someone is already working in the language. We see that for caregivers from English-speaking countries as well, such as the Caribbean. It makes no sense if someone is already working in the language. They have already proved that they are able to communicate. They certainly have the language needed to do their job. It makes no sense for them to have to once again take a language test to prove it for PR purposes, and then, after being a permanent resident, they may have to do it again for citizenship. It makes absolutely no sense that we continue to language-test folks.

There is another issue around deafness. How do we then test for language at all? That's a whole other conversation that we can have.

To answer your question, no, there isn't any need for caregivers, especially those who are having such a difficult time transitioning to PR, to have to pay to take classes and then take the test to prove that they can speak a language that they have been working in for two, three or four years, if not longer.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

On the caregivers program, we also run into another problem. With all of the delays and the quota that is in place, many of the applicants would not even be able to get a spot to apply. What's your recommendation on how to address that situation?

[Debbie Douglas]

I believe the government needs to lift caps. I understand the backlog. I think it's something we're all struggling with, in all streams of immigration. The government needs to build capacity in the system.

I agree with Madame Bien-Aimé in terms of removing some of the bureaucracy for particular streams, particularly things like family reunification, spousal sponsorship and those pieces. We need to build capacity in the system. We need to lift the cap on caregivers being able to transition from temporary workers to PRs.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, Ms. Douglas. Your time is up, Ms. Kwan.

With that, I will thank all the witnesses for appearing before the committee.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

There are two minutes left on the clock. I would love to have them, since I'm up next for questions. Is that okay?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Since not everyone will be able to have it—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I know, but the round shows me next, so....

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

We can have a quick 30 seconds for each person, if that's the will of the committee. We have two minutes left. To provide an equal opportunity for all, with a time slot for everyone, each party can have 30 seconds.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you.

Imam Badat, Ramadan mubarak. Thank you for being with us.

I want to distinguish between two issues—the issue of the principle of marriage verification and the issue of how it's been implemented. Clearly, you identified some problems in implementation. The government has been in for seven years. They haven't improved on the implementation at all. I think the policy objective is maybe a good one, but the implementation is clearly problematic and not being done in a culturally appropriate way.

Could you share with us some suggestions on how we could implement the policy objective of ensuring that we're verifying that we're talking about real marriages but doing it in a way that's culturally sensitive and that responds to the realities of how marriage operates in different cultures?

[Yusuf Badat]

Thank you so much.

If we understand how marriage takes place, for example from a cultural point of view, then it will be easy to identify that the marriage has taken place. If we don't have any idea of how marriage takes place in different cultures and different communities, it would be challenging to assume that marriages only take place in a particular way.

I think that cultural education would help. Input from the experts of that community and that society will facilitate a better understanding so that it can be verified that this is a genuine marriage.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you.

I wonder if you could just follow up in writing with any specific suggestions that could guide IRCC in the process of verification, specifically in your—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting, Mr. Genuis. Imam Badat, you can submit that in writing.

Mr. Genuis got one minute and 30 seconds, so we will give one minute and 30 seconds to Mr. El-Khoury.

Mr. El-Khoury, you can begin, please.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Thank you.

[Ramadan mubarak, Imam Badat.]

Imam Badat, I totally agree with you that the Harper government complicated the process, and it was terrible. Since 2015 the government in power has reformed it—and I could give you some examples—by reducing the unification time between spouses for up to 12 months and continuing, but COVID complicated the issue.

I understand your pain, because I have a lot of Muslim communities in my riding. Mind you, when we put doubt in the mind of the agent, he has to go further in the applications. Honestly speaking, in my riding we found a couple of marriages that were fake. When this comes to the minds of the staff, they have to verify for security whether there was some terrorist activity beyond that.

However, in order to come to a point to solve this issue, I will request you, if it's possible, to submit to this committee in writing what your concerns are and recommendations to solve this and clarify a way to continue our efforts in solving this problem.

Thank you.

[Yusuf Badat]

You're very welcome. Yes, I will definitely do that.

I do understand that there are genuine cases and that there might be fraudulent activity as well, but we need to create that balance where the majority that are genuine cases are not affected by the procedures that we adopt.

It will be my pleasure to submit documentation for your review.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you for that, Imam Badat.

Your time is up, Mr. El-Khoury.

We will have 45 seconds for Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe. Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, you can begin, please.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to recognize Ms. Bien‑Aimé, if she would like to add anything. I found what she said so topical and fascinating that I will let her have the last word.

[Marie Carmel Bien-Aimé]

Thank you, and I would just like to add a comment.

With respect to 179(b), I would recommend that temporary resident visa applications be processed in Canada, because Canada is a little more open to cultural differences. It would also be great if the officer making the decision on the visa application wouldn't be jaded because they work in a local office. The goal is to eliminate geographic bias.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting. The time is up.

We will now end our panel with Ms. Kwan for 45 seconds.

Ms. Kwan, you can go ahead, please.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thank you to Madame Bien-Aimé for that clarification. I absolutely agree with her proposal.

I'd like to ask Ms. Douglas this question, though.

The government has provided emergency visas for Ukraine and then also announced that they would provide special immigration measures for extended family members from Ukraine. Do you think that the government should apply the same special immigration measures to people from Afghanistan and other regions where people are also faced with dire situations?

[Debbie Douglas]

Absolutely. Thank you for that question.

We especially applaud the government on the extension of the definition of “family”. It is something that we absolutely support, but these family reunification measures must also be extended to other communities, to Afghans and to other refugee populations and other folks who are also displaced.

I think it's long overdue for us to recognize that the nuclear family is a western construct. It doesn't necessarily represent the majority of the world. If families are willing to support each other to bring each other into Canada, it makes absolute sense that they be supported to do so.

I believe that after redefining “family” for the purposes of Ukraine, the government needs to extend that redefinition to all communities who want to come to Canada, whether they are coming here as refugees or through family reunification.