Evidence of meeting #19 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:25 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Madam Chair, my colleague Madam Lang would have some additional information to clarify an answer to the member, if that's okay.
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Maybe it could be a quick answer, because I have additional questions.
12:25 p.m.
Tara Lang Director General, Central Network, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Just to be clear, Chinook is a tool that's designed to simplify the visual representation of information that is in GCMS, the global case management system.
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Sorry, I'm going to interrupt here for a minute, Madam Chair. I'm asking for the quality assurance program, not how Chinook works.
12:25 p.m.
Director General, Central Network, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Absolutely.
12:25 p.m.
Director General, Central Network, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
It is simply a system that an officer uses to make a decision. If we were to implement a quality assurance framework, which we have, it is on our officer's decisions. It would not be on the Chinook system itself, because Chinook does not keep any privacy information. It does not retain information from the global case management system. All of our decision-makers have quality assurance exercises that are used to complete the verification of whether the decision was correct or not.
On the question about the quality assurance system and the module itself, it was not simply a module within Chinook to do quality assurance but a way in which officers could also use the global case management system to identify flags to verify quality assurance exercises that were completed.
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Thank you.
Maybe I can then ask the officials, Madam Chair, to table to the committee their quality assurance program and its application for all of the tools that it applies to and how it is applied. Maybe the officials can also provide the data on what stream and what country these quality assurance programs are being used for and the results coming out of them.
With respect to the results, if, for example, the application of quality assurance is being applied and the results don't check out—you looked into it, and even in this instance with Chinook, with individuals making the assessment, the outcome does not check out—what are the next steps? Are applications then re-evaluated by someone else? How do the officials or the department deal with that? If I can get that information, then—
12:25 p.m.
Director General, Central Network, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Yes, absolutely. We can provide the background on the QA. I think that was asked previously by one of the members, so Madam Chair, that would be no problem.
In terms of reconsideration of quality assurance decisions, it depends on the line of business. There are different mechanisms that could be considered. There could be reconsideration of a decision by an existing officer. A decision could be reconsidered by a new officer. There are different mechanisms available if we find that a decision was made improperly.
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Can we then get the information on how that is being applied, under what stream, and in what country, broken down accordingly?
Where there are concerns raised, I would like to actually know how often applications are re-examined. How often are they being sent to someone else for an examination, and then what is the outcome of that if the decisions differ between the original assessment and the reassessment by someone else? If I could get that data, it would be appreciated.
On the issue around anti-racism training, we had witnesses who came forward and raised the concern that on anti-racism training—and IRCC acknowledged that racism exists within the department—what needs to be done is not a module that people can go through, but really in-depth training. What kind of anti-racism training is being done within the department right now for its middle managers and executive-level staff?
12:25 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
We're in full agreement that training in the form of online training in particular, or a module, is not the only mechanism or the only tool that is being used within the department, or should be used in order to improve—
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Sorry for interrupting, Ms. Xavier. Time is up for Ms. Kwan. You can come back in the second round.
We will now proceed to our second round. The second round will start with Mr. Redekopp.
Mr. Redekopp, you will have five minutes for your round of questioning. You can begin, please.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to come back to the issues raised by Ms. Kwan at the beginning of our meeting. I'm disturbed by the way the government is ignoring the will of Parliament and this committee by delaying, blocking and withholding documents requested by this committee. We just heard all about that at the beginning.
Just for some clarity, since I don't trust the department to respond in a timely manner, I would like to clarify Ms. Kwan's earlier request by verifying that the information requested by Ms. Kwan earlier in the meeting would be tabled by 4 p.m. on Monday, May 10. Is that clear, Madam Chair?
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Sorry for interrupting. You would like that to be tabled by this coming Monday?
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK
Yes, by Monday, May 10. I think that's reasonable. It was indicated that the information is available.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Ms. Kwan actually requested that it be within three days when she initially requested it, so I think we'll have to go by that.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK
I want to switch to talk about the production of papers motion, which directly relates to this racism study.
As you're aware, I put forward this production of papers motion back in February, supported unanimously by the committee, requiring the department to provide documents related to racism. The officials were given a deadline of March 30, which they complied with. However, until last week, we as committee members didn't know that the department had failed to comply with the rule of having to submit everything in both official languages. We had to get it translated after the fact.
The department also failed to abide by Parliament's absolute authority when it comes to examining original and unredacted documents. I just want to read a passage from House of Commons Procedure and Practice, at page 137:
By virtue of the preamble and section 18 of the Constitution Act, 1867, Parliament has the ability to institute its own inquiries, to require the attendance of witnesses and to order the production of documents, rights which are fundamental to its proper functioning. These rights are as old as Parliament itself....
As stated in a report of the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections in 1991:
The power to send for persons, papers and records has been delegated by the House of Commons to its committees in the Standing Orders. It is well established that Parliament has the right to order any and all documents to be laid before it which it believes are necessary for its information. … The power to call for persons, papers and records is absolute, but it is seldom exercised without consideration of the public interest. The House of Commons recognizes that it should not require the production of documents in all cases; considerations of public policy, including national security, foreign relations...
and so forth.
My motion explicitly excluded national security and cabinet confidence, yet the redaction of documents provided to this committee by your department on the basis of solicitor-client privilege, as found in the Access to Information Act, disregards this absolute power of Parliament.
Our committee received a letter from the House of Commons's law clerk that stated, “The House’s and its committees’ power to order the production of records constitutes a constitutional parliamentary privilege that is not limited by the exemptions found in the Access to Information Act.”
As a result, our committee met and decided that our chair would write to the deputy minister with a deadline of 4 p.m. yesterday for the documents to be sent to this committee unredacted, yet the deputy minister wrote back to reaffirm redactions on the basis of solicitor-client privilege. She said, “Redactions have been applied to two documents under section 23 of the Access to Information Act for the protection of solicitor-client privilege.”
Madam Xavier, can you confirm that your department—Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada—is aware that you have breached parliamentary privilege?
12:30 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Thank you for the question.
What I am aware of is that when we submitted the package originally, there were a few pages that needed to be translated or whose translation needed to be improved. I do believe that we have complied with that as of April 29, when we submitted the second package to the clerk.
The government is of the view that it cannot be compelled to disclose information such as solicitor-client privileged information.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK
If you were just listening to what I read, though, that is not the case. You don't seem to be overly concerned about this.
It's clear that Parliament has the right to require all of these documents, and the law clerk is the one who actually does the redacting. Do you take what we're doing seriously here, or is this another case of the government's ignoring the will of Parliament and doing whatever it wants to?
12:30 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Madam Chair, we take very seriously the work of this committee and are very much looking forward to the recommendations of this study to be able to help us to do our job even better.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK
Does the fact that the department is not willing to let the law clerk do the redactions and is doing its own redactions mean that there is potentially another Liberal government cover-up here that we should be concerned about?
12:35 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Madam Chair, I am not aware of any cover-ups that are being attempted. At this point in time, the interpretation and view of the government is that it cannot be compelled to disclose the information related to solicitor-client privilege.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK
Just to make sure that we understand how this works, the parliamentary law clerk is supposed to see the unredacted documents first, and then he can determine if anything needs to be redacted. If your department does the redacting, then the law clerk is unable to determine the accuracy of these redactions. Do you not trust the parliamentary law clerk to do his job?