Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Feb. 3rd, 2022

[Jared Maltais, Interim Executive Director, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations]

Thank you so much.

I think Christian handled it well, but I would add that there is also a resourcing issue on the ground in some of these francophone countries across Africa. We've been hearing this from students at some of our member campuses who are looking to come to Canada after applying from some of these francophone countries. As you've heard in some of the introductory statements, there is a resourcing issue in terms of outsourcing the approval of these applications to visa application centres in different countries, whereas you don't see that kind of discrepancy across other regions of the world.

In terms of the proportion of francophone international students, we are seeing it as a resource problem, on the ground principally, and a communication issue around what exactly international students need to bring to the table to prove that they are willing and financially ready to come to Canada.

What we're advocating for is more transparency and more communication around the exact needs that international students must provide at these visa application centres and for more resources on the ground. We don't have the technical expertise in the Chinook system that some of the other experts seem to have. What we're hearing from anecdotal student stories is that it is a resourcing issue on the ground.

I'll hand it over to the other witness.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry. Your time is up.

We will now proceed to Ms. Kwan for six minutes.

Please proceed, Ms. Kwan.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for your presentations today.

I would first like to go to Mr. Tao.

In your presentation you were going to say something about the ombudsperson. Could you finish that thought for me, please?

[Wei William Tao]

Perhaps I can summarize it into overarching tangible first steps because I know the committee is looking for tangible steps.

I think the appointment of an independent ombudsperson or an immigration commission, like the human rights commission in various provinces where there's a tribunal that does the work and a commission that studies the issue, would allow for those recommendations that I've put forward to be acted upon. The importance is that separation and independence. Those who are creating the rules and creating the systems can't be the only people to review them at the same time. There needs to be some independence. There need to be experts, academics, the public media involved. All the stakeholders need to be part of that. I think an ombudsperson allows for that to happen.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much.

I'll quickly go to the other witnesses on the same question.

Would you agree that IRCC needs an independent ombudsperson to be in place?

I'll go first to Mr. Dangzalan.

[Lou Janssen Dangzalan]

Thank you, Madam Kwan.

I absolutely agree with the idea that there should be an ombudsperson who can independently review, from time to time, the decisions that are taken in IRCC.

I'll go back to Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe's point in regard to resourcing and transparency. Having that ombudsperson is very important because it will crack open that black box especially in West African countries.

For example, to clarify this, in Dakar there is only one office that deals with most of the applications coming in from West Africa. What's going on? That ombudsperson can go in there and actually find out.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

Mr. Fotang, would you quickly respond to the same question? Then I need to ask further questions around the issue.

[Christian Fotang]

Thank you, MP Kwan. I'll go straight to it.

Similar to what Mr. Tao and Mr. Dangzalan said, I think more transparency needs to occur within IRCC. CASA always believes that more oversight is a good thing. I'll keep it at that.

It's also been said that a lot of the—

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you. I have limited time, and I do want to get these other questions in.

On the Chinook issue, as I understand it, one of the issues with this artificial intelligence system is that it uses certain words or phrases to red-flag applications. Given that with the Pollara report we know that there are internal biases and stereotypical attitudes within IRCC, do you see this as a problem, with IRCC themselves having people create this artificial intelligence system, that those biases could be embedded into these systems and therefore create differential outcomes, or even, I would argue, discriminatory outcomes targeted towards certain countries?

From that perspective, Mr. Tao, what do you think are the certain words or phrases that are used and problematic within the Chinook system, especially in the case of African countries and franco-African applicants?

[Wei William Tao]

Thank you, Ms. Kwan. I'll keep my answer really short.

It's a black box. I think that's a problem, because they're saying that Chinook is not AI, and therefore it doesn't need the oversight. The process of adding risk words is [Technical difficulty—Editor] applying for a volunteer job. You put a name forward, or a word forward, and it's decided by an internal committee. That's it. There is no independent oversight.

I think it's highly problematic in light of the report you cited.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Okay.

On this issue, one of the assessments from IRCC on applications is whether or not they have close ties back home. Do they have the financial resources? What country are they from? What region are they from and so on? These are triggering aspects that generate, I think, a response that generally says they are denied on the grounds that IRCC staff do not believe they will return home at the end of their study. That's the outcome we're seeing, right? With an approval rate of only 26%, that speaks for itself.

On this note, because you're a student, because of the stage of life you're in, you may not be married. Does that not in and of itself tell you that there is an inherent bias within the system that IRCC [Technical difficulty—Editor] looking at?

That's for Mr. Tao, and then I'll go to Mr. Dangzalan.

[Wei William Tao]

Absolutely. I think it's actually intersectional. I highlight in my brief the young and single mobile without dependants. I think that's a very harmful speech, applying to even tell a high school graduate student or someone who is coming for first-year studies.

So yes, I agree with you, Ms. Kwan. We need to work on that. We need to figure out what the biases are behind those refusal grounds.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Dangzalan.

[Lou Janssen Dangzalan]

I will reiterate what Mr. Tao has just said, but I will add that in the history of Chinook, we have found out, at least from snippets of emails that we've received through ATIP disclosures, that QA, or quality assurance, was actually an afterthought. They just cobbled together this software out of Excel: “Oops. We need to do QA before we get litigated.”

It's funny, because Mr. Tao already highlighted that it was introduced by way of litigation. What does that say about a system?

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Yes. What we know, of course, is that the Chinook system really brought this to the forefront in many ways, although the government did it all behind closed doors and it took litigation for it to be exposed. I believe the same sentiments were being applied before Chinook.

Would you agree with that, Mr. Tao and Mr. Dangzalan, just very quickly?

[Wei William Tao]

Absolutely. I think the pandemic has made it worse, because the borders have served as a colour line.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Dangzalan.

[Lou Janssen Dangzalan]

I absolutely agree with that.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Okay.

On the—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting, Ms. Kwan. Your time is up.

Based on the time, we can have one quick question from each party before we finish this panel and go to our witnesses on the second panel. Each party can have one minute.

MP Redekopp, you have one minute for your intervention. Please proceed.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thanks.

My questions are for Mr. Fotang and Mr. Maltais.

The student direct stream is open from a variety of countries, and 56% of the students came from India and China. I'd just like to know what value you think the student direct stream brings to Canada.

[Christian Fotang]

Jared, would you like to take that?

[Jared Maltais]

Absolutely, I'd be happy to take that.

We believe that bringing international students from a variety of countries, especially through a process like the student direct stream, which obviously accelerates that process, is good for Canada. It's great for the Canadian economy at large as we're bringing in great talent and people who can contribute to the future of the Canadian economy while they're studying here and after they graduate as they look to set out on their career.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Your time is up.

We will now proceed to Mr. Dhaliwal for a quick question. You have a minute.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, I hear many sad and troubling stories of international students being victims of exploitation, trafficking and harassment. I have read these reports in the media. It's putting a lot of pressure on international students, which has led to a rise in suicide rates across Canada.

Could the witnesses tell us how the stakeholders involved, whether government, post-secondary institutions or those in the immigration field, can address this and better support these wonderful foreign students?