Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Nov. 22nd, 2022

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses.

I'd like to ask the representatives from The Refugee Centre to put on the record their recommendations for the committee, after which I have one very specific question.

[Pierre-Luc Bouchard]

The last recommendation, that we didn't have time to finish explaining, concerns extending the validity period of the refugee claimant document.

We witnesses are trying to convince you that there are a lot of administrative formalities. As Mr. André said, these are people who have a lot of trouble with computers and all that.

We therefore recommend that the validity period of the refugee protection claimant document be extended to four years from its current length, two years.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

I'd like to ask all the witnesses this one very specific question. Given the situation that we know and the dangers that asylum seekers are in, should the Canadian government, at the very minimum, suspend the safe third country agreement?

Could I get a full round of responses from everyone, a clear answer and maybe a short bit on why that should be done?

I will start with Mr. Daoud.

[Abdulla Daoud]

Yes, they should suspend the safe third country agreement.

Basically, we're forcing asylum seekers to go onto terrain that's very dangerous. We've already established that these are legitimate claims and that what they're going through is very unfortunate. In order to regulate the matter and ensure that the government and community organizations can service them correctly, we need to suspend it.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Do you have anything to add to that answer, Mr. Bouchard?

[Pierre-Luc Bouchard]

No, I think he summarized it well.

Excuse me.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Okay. Thank you.

I will move on to Ms. Rududura.

[Eva-Gazelle Rududura]

In view of what our community reports to us, we have to make sure that the people experiencing these odysseys are received with dignity. That is what we suggest. I don't think that agreement has anything to do with what these people endure. I think Canada can only control the way it allows people to get back to a normal life and contribute to society. Otherwise, for the rest, I think people go through all sorts of situations even before taking that route. We therefore have no recommendations on that point.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

If the Canadian government suspended the safe third country agreement, for example, people would not have to go through irregular entries. In fact, they could go through the official ports of entry without any fear. Right now, because of the safe third country agreement, they are not allowed to do that. When they do, they will be rejected automatically.

This is why I ask the question of whether the government should suspend the safe third country agreement.

I'm going to turn to Mr. André regarding the same question.

[Frantz André]

I would reiterate that in my opinion, we have to eliminate the safe third country agreement. I think people would be much less afraid of migrating, knowing they are able to enter at a port of entry whose role it is to admit people with dignity. Taking a route where you are told that if you continue, you will be arrested, means enduring more stress and a form of aggression after being refouled by so many countries. That is why I strongly suggest that the safe third country agreement be eliminated.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you for that.

The Canadian government says it's “modernizing” the safe third country agreement. That's the term it uses. It won't actually tell us what that means and what its plans are in the negotiations with the United States.

What we've seen, of course, is that the government, in a hidden kind of way, expanded the use of the safe third country agreement. In the omnibus budget bill, Bill C-97, a 379-page document, the government snuck in there the safe third country agreement application to the Five Eyes countries. That automatically turns people away if they try to seek asylum here in Canada.

Do you think that's right?

This question is directed to The Refugee Centre. I don't know who wants to respond to that.

[Abdulla Daoud]

Going along with what we said, that's not right.

Given what these refugees are going through and given the legitimacy of these claims, we should not be rejecting them. We've already established that the alternative is not good and they would be facing danger otherwise.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. André, I have the same question for you, please.

[Frantz André]

Thank you for your question.

Expanding that agreement with the United States to include the other member countries of the Five Eyes, instead of suspending it, would be an indication that Canada is increasingly closed to immigration and is ending up creating many more restrictions in the world for people who would like to come and experience our Quebec and Canadian values. Yes, I think the Canadian government is plainly not showing that it intends to cancel the safe third country agreement.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

With the process around the brown paper and the delay, the government added this “entry for further examination” document. Is that new?

[Abdulla Daoud]

Yes. We started seeing this in January 2022. They've always had the right to do it, but we've only seen that being established in January 2022.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

As a result of that, how much time has been added to the processing period?

[Abdulla Daoud]

It's an additional 12 to 24 months, depending on the CBSA officer or IRCC agent who wants to issue the document.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

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

We will now proceed to our second round.

Mr. Redekopp, you will have two minutes for your round of questioning. Please begin.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm going to give my time to Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

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

I am grateful to my Conservative friends for giving me a bit of time.

Ms. Rududura, I understand that you may have been invited by one party in particular, and that is fine. I greatly appreciated your testimony.

Would you be in favour of giving migrants the opportunity to arrive in Canada by the regular route via different ports of entry and, for example, giving them access to community resources faster?

[Eva-Gazelle Rududura]

I would be in favour of everything that would give migrants, and people who need to find a safe place to have a normal life, an opportunity to obtain the services they need and to be supported.

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

Thank you, Ms. Rududura.

Mr. André, there is a larger influx of migrants, especially in recent months. Have you felt that services to migrants, particularly in Montreal, are deteriorating because of the influx of migrants, which is concentrated in a single location?

[Frantz André]

Yes, I have.

Right now, I am in an office where we provide a service to refugees. We see more and more people who have no resources. Let's not forget that we are in a country where it is getting cold very fast. People are arriving with no coats and no boots. People have no food.

I am not here to pat myself on the back, but I have had to take money out of my pocket so a family could buy milk. A man was in my office when his wife called me to tell me they needed help. They didn't have money to buy food, because they had been waiting for months to get their "brown papers"and work permits.

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

Logically, if the safe third country agreement is suspended, people would arrive at various ports of entry and would have access to more services. Is that right?