Public Safety Committee on Aug. 28th, 2024

[D/Commr Bryan Larkin]

As indicated earlier, a significant amount of work has gone into this investigation in a short period of time, with a significant number of resources dedicated. I want to highlight the excellent work of GTA INSET and all of our police of jurisdiction.

We do have a matter before the court. Of course, with such a large national security investigation, although there are charges before the judicial system, our investigation continues. I'm limited in what I can say, and I must refrain from commenting on specifics or ongoing investigative pieces, but what I can tell you is that we continue to actively investigate and continue to do the work that is required as part of the investigation. Charges have been laid, but we have an ongoing, active investigation.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

I'll read between the lines with that statement. I thank you for that statement, that potentially there is an affirmative response to the question I put to you, although I'm not asking for any confirmation.

I want to talk briefly about biometrics. Is it only in relation to fingerprints, or are we now advanced in terms of taking a look at facial recognition as part of biometrics?

[Dr. Harpreet S. Kochhar]

Mr. Chair, biometrics include the fingerprints. I'll have to confirm whether they do the facial recognition piece, but with biometrics, certainly the information is on the fingerprints.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Would you confirm that to committee within a couple of weeks after your appearance?

[Dr. Harpreet S. Kochhar]

We will confirm that.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Brock.

We'll go now to Mr. Gaheer for three minutes, please.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for appearing before the committee.

My questions are for Dr. Kochhar from the immigration department.

This essentially started with a visitor visa. An individual was granted a visitor visa. They came to Canada. They applied for asylum.

I want to focus on the security screening process for a visitor visa. I understand that the security screening is trilateral—CSIS, CBSA and IRCC. I'll give you an example. I have lots of cases in my constituency office where an individual has applied for a visitor visa for a family member overseas, potentially from India, let's say, and they have worked in the army or in the local police force. That immigration process, that security screening, can take years. I have cases that have been stuck in limbo for three, four or five years now, just looking at that security screening.

What sorts of security screening are happening overseas? What information is requested? Are interviews conducted? With countries like India or Pakistan, potentially, from which I have a lot of constituents, what information is requested from those local governments? What does that co-operation look like?

[Dr. Harpreet S. Kochhar]

Mr. Chair, let me start by saying what I mentioned earlier, that IRCC is the first line of defence, where we are doing the initial security screening. Based on the risk indicators, we ask the questions. We also have the biometrics availability. We work with our security partners to see what kind of pinging we get from the different databases. We also look at our own databases. Has this person used a different name or alias or different passport? This is all part of the common platform where we begin with the temporary resident visa.

If there is any indication or any flag, we refer it for a comprehensive security screening, which takes place with the CBSA and CSIS. As the IRCC office, we can only make an admissibility decision once the officer is satisfied, after consultation with our security partners, that there is a favourable return on the security flag or the advance security or comprehensive security screening. If there is not, then we will call it non-admissible and the person will not be allowed to enter into Canada.

As my colleague Ted explained earlier, there are different risk indicators that our security partners work through in terms of their association with different governments and different regimes. That part is actually worked through by our security partners. If it is not available to us or if it is inconclusive, it takes a bit more time before that security or admissibility is actually passed and the person is granted the visa.

I don't know, Ted, if you want to add anything to that one.

[Ted Gallivan]

I would just say that military service certainly triggers a deeper dive. We customize the decision based on the person's role, the time period in which they served and whether or not they were a conscript. Again, that's the hard work of the security screening. It's to do a deeper dive on the individual to ascertain their role and what behaviours they engaged in during their period of service.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Just to follow up on that, are investigations conducted—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I'm sorry, Mr. Gaheer. We're out of time.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

I think the only organization that won't be back at the next meeting is Public Safety. With the others, you may be able to renew these questions then.

Mr. Fortin, you have the floor for three minutes.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Kochhar, all your colleagues from every department clearly explained the standard process, and they clearly told us that they had done the necessary work in this case, as in all cases. I don't doubt for a moment the competence and good faith of all stakeholders in all departments in this matter. However, like all Quebeckers and Canadians, I can't help but notice that there has been a major failure that has led to the situation that we are studying in committee today. I'm looking for a way to make sure it doesn't happen again. We just want to be constructive here.

How can you explain what has happened? Might there be too many requests for screenings for them to be done in a reasonable time? Are you budget-constrained or short-staffed?

What can be done to improve the efficiency of the screening system?

[Dr. Harpreet S. Kochhar]

I thank the member for his question.

I would start by saying that first and foremost, volumes do not trump the security, which we place much more...a lot of importance on. Our assessment of the applications is actually taking a very critical look into the security of Canada and into the individuals who are assessed on the security screening component. Volumes do not modify our approach to that.

We continue to see increased volumes. That is for sure. However, we are also dedicating equivalent resources to our security and to our processing, and making sure that we are giving the right attention to the right parameters.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Kochhar. I don't mean to be rude, but I have less than a minute left.

I would ask the same question of Ms. Lloyd.

In your opinion, does the volume of requests or the budget have an impact on the results?

[Vanessa Lloyd]

Thank you.

I will repeat my earlier testimony, honourable member, in that we take the time and go through the steps, which are very robust, that are necessary in order to ensure that we effectively execute our responsibilities with regard to security screening and to ensure the safety and security of Canadians.

I would echo the point that this is a collaborative effort between the three agencies.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Lloyd.

Mr. Larkin, I'll ask you the same question. In your opinion, is the volume of requests too high or are the budgets insufficient?

[D/Commr Bryan Larkin]

I thank the member for his question.

Again, the RCMP has a limited involvement in the immigration screening process, and much of it is using technology and innovation. I can tell you that year to date, through automation, we've actually processed more than 3.9 million screening immigration processes. Again, we rely on technology, and we have significant technology and resources to manage the ongoing demand.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Fortin.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

The technology is limited.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

We will go to Mr. MacGregor, please, for three minutes.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Mr. Chair, I think we understand very well that there are ongoing internal investigations for this process. Of course, not much can be divulged not only because of the sensitive nature of those investigations but also because there is an ongoing criminal investigation and trial.

From the point of view as legislators, we not only vote on appropriations for each of your agencies but also have an important role in reviewing the policies and the legislation that you operate. Maybe this is a question to the Department of Public Safety. In our review of this case and potentially in making recommendations to the government, are there any gaps that you feel legislators should be addressing in terms of legislative gaps or policy gaps? Are there resource gaps or financial gaps that may help us deal with this issue in the future? Is there anything on which you can inform the committee from a legislator's point of view?

[Shawn Tupper, Deputy Minister, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Chair, I think one thing I would offer is to wait and hear from the operational agencies about the review of the process that was followed, particularly the review that CBSA has mentioned in terms of the audit they're doing on a series of files, to confirm that we have the right kinds of structures and processes in place. I think that will be really informative to the committee because it might express where there may be gaps in the process that can be filled. I think that's useful.

I think ongoing dialogues at committee around data and information sharing are pretty critical elements for all of us, particularly for our ability to be more transparent. I think that for future discussions, those elements would be really useful for the committee to consider and to provide advice on.

On the question of resources, just rest assured that for those of us here who, frankly, carry that burden and that weight of responsibility for looking at national security on behalf of Canadians, every single day, our number one priority is to move our resources to focus on those questions, every single day. That is not an issue for us. Being a good public servant, I could say we could always use more money, but I just want you to rest assured that the availability of resources and the capacity to do our jobs is not a question. All of us take that seriously. All of us focus on making sure we have adequate resources to do the job.