Public Safety Committee on Sept. 28th, 2017

[A/Commr Joanne Crampton]

Mr. Chair, I'm sorry, I'd have to defer to CBSA for that question.

[Jacques Cloutier]

Again quickly, we will provide those numbers to you.

[The Co-Chair (Mr. Robert Oliphant), Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you very much,

Mr. Dubé.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. MacDonald, I want to go back to the question of diasporas, because if that's what's explaining a concentration at certain border crossings, I have a hard time reconciling that fact with what we see in policy terms in the United States.

Just as a couple of examples, you talked about the Somali diaspora in Minnesota. We know that in November 2016, Mr. Trump was saying that Somali migrants are a disaster for Minnesota, and we see increases at Emerson.

We know that his interim director of the immigration agency in the U.S. was contemplating removing protections for Haitians, and we see an increase then in Lacolle.

If you're acknowledging that we're seeing migrants at specific crossings because of where diasporas are located in the U.S. and that these specific groups of people are being targeted—and we have this on the public record—how does the department then say that American policies are not behind this massive movement of migrants at these specific border crossings?

[Michael MacDonald]

It comes down to whether the individuals actually choose to move. Again, historical patterns of migration movement across Canada from the United States exist. We know that. We have our regional footprints, regional infrastructure, and regional offices set up, and we are staffed accordingly. We are baseline-funded to amounts where typically the system is working.

Again, why people are moving and whether people will move is very much a question we are engaging with colleagues, not just Americans but colleagues around the world, to try to figure out factors that push people or pull people.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

In your opinion, though, the fact that we are seeing these crossings happen at specific areas means that specific groups of people are moving. Is that correct?

[Michael MacDonald]

Correct, specific people are moving across specific areas, as well as all kinds of nationalities. All nationalities make asylum into Canada. There just happen to be populations that tend to move more, for a variety of world factors, world reasons, such as war, as I explained.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

I think it's safe to say that Emerson and Lacolle are the two key points over the last nine to 10 months.

If we look at the fact that in Manitoba, if I am not mistaken, the majority are Somali, a group targeted by Mr. Trump in Minnesota, and in Quebec the majority are Haitians, a group that was also targeted, how does the department believe that the status quo is reigning? Is there anything specific that leads you to believe that these groups of people are not being targeted and that's not what the numbers are reflecting? The numbers do reflect that those groups of people are the ones who are moving at those specific areas.

[Michael MacDonald]

Again, what we are noticing is that, despite some of the temporary protection lifts the United States has done, there is movement of people, but they are not telling us that these are necessarily the reasons. Some people are saying those are the reasons. We also don't know what other measures the U.S. or any other country might take when they lift temporary protection status, and what people could benefit from. It's very difficult to pinpoint why.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

I just want to make sure I understand correctly. The basis for the department not believing that discriminatory policies are the reason for migration is simply what we could almost call “exit interviews”. Is that correct?

[Michael MacDonald]

No, not at all.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Then what is the basis for not thinking that these groups are moving because they are being targeted via certain policies?

[Michael MacDonald]

As Mr. MacKinnon was explaining, there is a combination of factors. We do regular reviews through our department on country conditions of all countries around the world in terms of refugee movements. We are members of the UNHCR, and we are working with members of the UNHCR. We work with international organizations to figure out migration patterns: why people are moving and what's pushing people. We have bilateral and multilateral relationships where we talk about these issues, in particular asylum claiming, refugee issues, and so on. It's a combination of factors that go into it.

We are talking about how to plan and prepare ourselves for possible future movements that are difficult to predict. What I am communicating is that we have taken—you have to take—a very holistic approach to trying to figure out human behaviour in the future.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

That's fair. You're the experts. I look at Emerson having a huge increase in asylum seekers, the majority of whom are Somali, a group that was specifically targeted in that area by Mr. Trump as a candidate, who is now president, and, as a layperson on these particular issues, I see that as a pretty determining factor.

If that is not the key factor for the department, what else is at play?

[Michael MacDonald]

Part of the answer to that question is that it's not just Somalis, if we take the Emerson example. In fact, there is a significant number of Djiboutians, who are also moving up. The factors driving them may, in fact, be different than for the Somali community, yet the volume of movement is quite high. Similarly, Emerson tends to have a very healthy movement, if I can call it that, of people from Ghana and Eritrea. The mixture of other populations is making it difficult for us to say there is one factor pushing—

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Respectfully, is it correct to say that the majority of those who crossed at the Emerson crossing between January and August were of Somali origin?

[Michael MacDonald]

Correct.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Okay.

My question is for the officials from the Canada Border Services Agency.

I would like to better understand the role that your U.S. counterparts are playing right now. We hear a lot of rumours about that.

Are you able to clarify the role that U.S. Customs and Border Protection currently plays in coordinating the efforts at the border?

[Jacques Cloutier]

Mr. Chair, it is actually important to note that the USCBP partners are as much partners with the RCMP as they are with us. We have operational discussions on a regular basis. They are very familiar with our approach to the situation. It is an exceptional collaborative effort, from our point of view and from an operational point of view.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Can you elaborate on that agency's role? Does it have the role of defining movements or trying to control what happens at the border? Are you able to elaborate on its operations?

[Jacques Cloutier]

No. Broadly and generally speaking, the U.S. agency has its own mandate and responsibilities to follow; but I can tell you that we have operational relations that allow us to work together and assess how the situation is unfolding.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Thank you.

[The Co-Chair (Mr. Robert Oliphant), Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Sarai.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, guests.

I think that for Canadians, particularly for my constituents and British Columbians, the integrity of our border and compassion for those who need it are the two utmost issues that are important to them, and balancing those two is what's integral for our country. I applaud all of you and the answers that you've had. You've been balancing the integrity of our border, as well as being compassionate to those in need.

What shocks me more are some of my colleagues on the opposing side who only ask questions pertaining to costs, illegal migrants, criminality, deportations, how many removals, how much they cost to our country, and how they're a burden. It kind of reminds me of newspaper articles I read from over 103 years ago on the Komagata Maru. There were the same kinds of responses at the time from a lot of the politicians of similar stripes, and I find it appalling that 103 years later, we are still more concerned about criminality and calling them illegals than finding out why they're coming and what's needed.

There was a question asked about putting a port of entry at the place with the largest crossing. The reason people are going to that particular place is because it's not an official port of entry where they would otherwise be turned back. If we put a port of entry there, would that not just start another road or site that would be a place where asylum seekers would come? Could either the RCMP or CBSA answer that?

[A/Commr Joanne Crampton]

That would be our concern. It could displace people to other locations, certainly.