Citizenship and Immigration committee  I can offer a couple of comments and maybe others want to jump in. Certainly there have been broad investments, Mr. Chair, across all agencies simply to keep up with capacity. Those investments have been made both in the 2018 budget and significantly over the billion dollars in

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The minister referred to the term “deterrents”. That part of this is also about potential deterrents in the system. People will not make a claim in one of these countries, then come to Canada and make another claim.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  To reject asylum claims? No, it's a move to recognize that you should make your claim for asylum in the first safe country you enter.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  My colleague shared some figures of people claiming asylum in the U.S., then coming to Canada and claiming asylum, then being sent back to the U.S. under the safe third country agreement, and finally coming back to Canada through Roxham Road. In that case, we think it's best for

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Well, I'm aware, because as officials—

Citizenship and Immigration committee  That might be a political question, I think, Mr. Chair. I'm not sure exactly the question....

Citizenship and Immigration committee  As senior officials, we speak to our American colleagues all the time.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I can only speak to my conversations. In a general sense, we give them a briefing on what the government is putting in the BIA, and we'll keep them up to date as this committee deliberates on where you take this proposed legislation. It's very much a briefing type discussion.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I think it's fair to say, Mr. Chair, that they have responded positively, in that they haven't raised concerns with anything that's in the BIA.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  On the member's previous question, Mr. Chair, in the example of folks in Australia who are going off to one of the two islands, they don't actually make a claim in Australia. They're not allowed to make a claim in Australia. If they ended up wending their way to Canada somehow an

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I can offer a couple of thoughts. I guess the first thought would be that we are confident that this meets our international obligations, albeit it's a different process than going through the IRB. As I've said on a couple of occasions, it makes the determination based upon the s

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Remember that they both look at the same issues to determine refugee determination. It's the refugee convention and the convention against torture, so they're looking at the same standard.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Mr. Chair, they would have access to the U.S. asylum system. They cannot send those individuals back to Canada, because the treaty works both ways. If they went into the U.S. at an official port of entry, they would, of course, be returned to Canada.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Mr. Chair, in that specific case, because those individuals would not have made a claim in Australia, because they're not allowed to make a claim there, they would go through the IRB process here in Canada. We would not put them through this process, because this cohort is all ba

Citizenship and Immigration committee  If they made a bona fide claim in the U.S., yes. But to your specific example—