Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 19th, 2023

[Aaron McCrorie]

The 700 is a bit of mystery. We're not sure what the source of that number is. As I noted, when we launched this investigation, we identified about 2,000 files of concern. We then worked with our colleagues at IRCC to further refine them. That's when we identified 1,485 study permit applicants who may have had fraudulent documents.

That resulted in the cancellation of about 900 student permits. We identified about 440 applicants whose permits had been approved and who were here in the country. That then led to the about 300 that we are concerned about where the individuals may have had fraudulent documents.

I really want to give a caution around the numbers, because it is an active investigation, so they are subject to change. Of those, about 50% appear to have been genuine students. There were some who made real, concerted efforts when they arrived at school and found out that they hadn't, in fact, been admitted to the college or university. They made real, concentrated efforts to re-establish their status as a student and become a student.

Again, the numbers are going to fluctuate, but for 45% to 50% of the cases, we have no evidence at all that there was an attempt by the individual to go to school. We're going to dig into those cases further to understand what the exact circumstances are. Also, I'm going to say that in about 3% of files, or about 10 of the 300, we've found individuals who were involved in criminal behaviour.

There could be overlap between those numbers as well. I want to emphasize that they are subject to change, but that is exactly the work of the task force that IRCC has set up. It will be to go through those 300 files and understand the exact status of each individual.

[Shafqat Ali, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

Just to be clear, there are 700 that, as you said, are a mystery. It's close to 300 students who may be actively dealing with this issue.

What efforts are being made by Canada to stop these fraudulent actors abroad who take advantage of students seeking to study in Canada?

[Aaron McCrorie]

This is why I think it's important to talk about the layers of defence. Our colleagues last week here at the committee talked about the efforts being made on the part of the IRCC both overseas and here domestically. The layer of defence where we become involved is doing inland investigations here in Canada. We like to think that we're intelligence-driven. We have an intel function that tries to seek information, identify patterns of concern and use that information to drive investigations.

We have two types of investigations that we undertake. There are those that are administrative but tied to the regulations. We also do criminal investigations that are primarily focused on people doing large-scale attempts at fraud and those who are facilitating the fraud rather than those who are victims of the fraud.

Those are the layers of defence. It's a constant game as we refine them and get better at detecting fraud. Those who want to benefit from our system will seek other ways of circumventing the measures that are put in place. It's a continual effort to learn with each instance we work through, and to refine our measures further and continue our efforts.

Students have the initial responsibility of completing their documentation. If they feel they are a victim of fraud, they should report that to us so we can take additional action.

[Shafqat Ali, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

Thank you.

Do I just have 30 seconds?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

It's 25 seconds now.

[Shafqat Ali, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

If you want to add something more for 15 or 20 seconds, that would be great.

[Aaron McCrorie]

I would just say again that it's important for students who may suspect they have been provided with fraudulent documents to share that information with us so we can proactively launch additional investigations and tackle this problem.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you.

With that, we will now go to Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for being here today, gentlemen, for this important study. The committee really needed to hear from you.

In your opening remarks, and also in response to certain questions put to you, you said you had investigative techniques and precise rules to determine what constitutes fraud.

Who makes these rules at the Canada Border Services Agency?

[Aaron McCrorie]

Thank you for the question.

I'm not sure I understand that in terms of who sets out the rules. We provide our investigators with guidelines on how and when to conduct investigations. That is the function of our organization at CBSA. We are then seeking to ensure compliance with the IRPA regulations and legislation. We guide how our investigators do their work, and they're doing assessments against legislation and regulations.

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

That’s what I wanted to know.

Have these rules been updated since we began discussing the issue we are debating today, which affects some Indian students? Or have they remained the same? Should we be satisfied with them as they currently stand?

[Aaron McCrorie]

I would say that our guidelines are constantly evolving. They're evolving in at least two different respects. One is, as I noted, that efforts or attempts to engage in fraud evolve over time, so we need to provide new and additional guidance to our frontline staff on detection techniques.

In terms of how we do case management and where we set our priorities, that's also a constantly evolving product. Part of managing the program as a constant evolution is to make sure that we're focusing on the right things and giving our staff the right tools to address the challenges we're facing.

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

In short, today’s experience may lead to changes within your organization for future investigations.

[Aaron McCrorie]

Absolutely, we're always trying to learn.

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

Very well. Thank you for that.

In September 2022, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, in response to a report by the Committee on the inequity between Francophone African students and the rest of international students, admitted that there was indeed racism within its own department when it came to processing applications from Francophone students from Africa, in particular. Yet the same discriminatory criteria are used when processing applications from French-speaking foreign students from Africa to determine whether or not there is fraud in a student’s file. This worries me.

Because the government has admitted that there is racism within the Department of Citizenship and Immigration when processing certain applications, I would like to know if you think there is racism or unconscious bias when processing cases of fraud within your organization. I’d like to be reassured on this point. I’m asking you to clarify this because many people listening or watching would like to hear from you on this subject.

[Aaron McCrorie]

Especially around issues of systemic racism, it's a constant struggle. We always have to be focusing on that and asking ourselves the question of how we're doing as an organization.

I would say that with the processes we have in place, though, we do have safeguards. Our system isn't designed around an individual being able to make an arbitrary decision about what investigations to pursue and what action to take with that. We have a system of safeguards in place, including a management oversight review by ministerial delegates, and the guidance I've talked about to help ensure we avoid any challenges around systemic racism.

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

Does your organization provide training on unconscious bias when handling a case?

Sometimes it’s unconscious racism. Unconscious bias is unconscious racism. So it’s not necessarily the fault of the official dealing with a case of fraud or a foreign student’s application.

[Aaron McCrorie]

I'm going to turn to my colleague.

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

Very well.

[Carl Desmarais]

We could provide you with information indicating precisely what the training given to our front-line agents consists of.

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

That’s wonderful. I think it’s very important to offer this kind of training within the government apparatus.

This isn’t the first instance of student fraud, and it’s not the first time students have been victimized. In the past, I think it’s happened to students from Haiti or French-speaking Africa.

However, today we find ourselves at committee to discuss a story that is disastrous for many students from India. All of a sudden, the government is implementing specific measures regarding this issue, due to the fact that these students were victims of fraud.

How is it that, in the past, when this sort of thing happened to African and Haitian students, among others, the government neglected to put specific measures in place? What is your analysis of that situation? Isn’t it proof that there is indeed discrimination against students from other countries compared to students from India? How is this currently perceived?

[Aaron McCrorie]

It will be hard for me to comment. I'm not familiar with those previous cases. What I would say is that I think the system is working as it should. There are safeguards in place to avoid issues, and I think you're absolutely right that there are unconscious biases and the potential for systemic racism. We have safeguards against that.

The immigration system as a whole plays a role in gathering information and putting forward an allegation. It's just that; it's not our decision. The IRB then makes a decision. The IRB is an independent decision-maker that has the ability to make a decision and then reach a conclusion. After that, there are other safeguards in place, including appeals, recourse to the Federal Court and the ability to get a pre-removal risk assessment, that protect the rights of the individuals involved.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Your time is up, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

We will now proceed to Ms. Kwan.

Ms. Kwan, you will have six minutes. Please begin.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to the officials for coming to our committee today.

I'd like to go back to the numbers just a bit.

The minister and officials came last week and indicated that, of the 304 people who have been flagged as having a potential issue regarding misrepresentation, 57 received a removal order from the IRB. Your number seems to indicate that it's higher than 57.

I just want to circle back to that number 57. Is 57 the correct number for this cohort of students?

[Aaron McCrorie]

Again, I think we want to be very careful about the numbers. This is a live investigation. We are working with our IRCC colleagues in the task force in real time.

What I would say is that the numbers are subject to change. Today I can tell you that 52 removal orders have been issued.