Public Safety Committee on March 8th, 2012

[Claudette Deschênes]

I think it's clear that the government has recognized that we want to be able to figure out if they've left or not. That's why the work we're doing under the perimeter vision with the United States is about creating an entry–exit system.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

But currently there is no entry–exit system.

[Claudette Deschênes]

That is correct.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

So it's at the goodwill of the foreign person as to whether they leave or not.

[Claudette Deschênes]

That's correct.

At Immigration we are working, from a facilitation perspective, to do more with our key partners, like the schools, for example, to know if students who come into Canada are actually studying and in good standing. We are all incrementally improving these things.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

But there is no regulatory regime in place that goes step by step to make sure that person leaves Canada.

[Claudette Deschênes]

No.

[Caroline Melis]

As long as they have a valid status when they applied for their extension of stay—so the person applied for their extension of stay and for whatever reason it was turned down—they're still in that valid status until it expires, even though they have a letter that says their other application has been refused and they need to leave the country.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Ms. Young has a quick question, and then we're going to go back to the other side.

You only have about 40 seconds.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

To be perfectly clear—because I think Rick took my question—when people are in Canada legally but due to the different processes and applications, as you have already spoken about, they are no longer allowed to be in Canada for whatever reason, you notify them, and with the majority of those people you have no idea whether they leave or not.

If there are any cases of outstanding warrants or criminality, that gets referred to the CBSA. Then it becomes their case and it is no longer your case.

Is there a very clean and clear hand-off to them, and those people then become a case for CBSA?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

A very quick answer, please.

[Claudette Deschênes]

The quick answer is yes, except there are exceptions. So there is a hand-off, but then somebody may make another application of some type and they become—

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

A loop back.

[Claudette Deschênes]

—one of our clients who still has an enforcement action required by CBSA.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Scarpaleggia, please, for seven minutes.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to our committee and happy International Women's Day.

I missed some of what you said when you were talking about section 56 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Would you mind explaining the scope of section 56 again and telling us when that section came into effect?

I missed that part at the beginning of your presentation.

[Claudette Deschênes]

In response to the second part of your question, I cannot say with certainty whether the old act contained a provision similar to section 56 or not. However, this specific section has existed since 2002, when the new law was passed.

The section reads as follows:56. An officer may order the release from detention of a permanent resident or a foreign national before the first detention review by the Immigration Division if the officer is of the opinion that the reasons for the detention no longer exist. The officer may impose any conditions, including the payment of a deposit or the posting of a guarantee for compliance with the conditions, that the officer considers necessary.

It is the Canada Border Services Agency's job to determine whether to release someone without imposing any conditions or whether to recommend conditions—

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

This section does not really refer to electronic monitoring.

[Claudette Deschênes]

Electronic monitoring could be one of the conditions imposed.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Strictly speaking, though, it is not mentioned in the section.

[Claudette Deschênes]

It is not in the act.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

So if I understand correctly, the scope is broad enough to provide for electronic monitoring, giving the Canada Border Services Agency the authority to require people to wear an electronic monitoring bracelet.

I was also wondering if you could give us some insight into the recently introduced Bill C-31. Bill C-4 appears to have been amended slightly and incorporated into Bill C-31. As I understand it, adults coming to Canada as part of an irregular arrival could end up in detention. Children, however, would not be subject to such detention, which could last up to a year, according to Bill C-4, which I studied at the time.

[Claudette Deschênes]

I apologize, but I cannot answer that question. I work in operations. But we could send you the answer.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

That's fine. The facts are common knowledge, I am just having trouble remembering them.

Under Bill C-31, it also seems that Canada will start requiring students and visitors with temporary resident visas to submit to the collection of biometric information.

Are you familiar with the department's new policy to that effect? I don't think it comes under Bill C-31. I saw the minister on TV las night. After he made a speech—in Toronto, I believe—he talked about that, unless I saw it in a newspaper article this morning. Are you aware of the department's plan?