Citizenship and Immigration committee  Mr. Chair, they would remain in Canada, just as if they had gone to the IRB and that referral was in place. We're not going to remove anybody to a country—

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I was trying to say that it's a comparable process. If they go through this new process and there is a removal order in place, after the hearing is heard, the government would not remove somebody to a country where there was a removal order in place.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  It's about at the 3,500 level over a two-year period.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  We've certainly worked with the Department of Justice on that analysis, and we have the charter analysis. Whether or not, Mr. Chair, Justice is okay with our tabling that before the committee.... We'll certainly follow up on this question.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Mr. Chair, I can say a few things on that. I do know that the United Kingdom follows a similar process. The concept is a fairly straightforward one to assist our colleagues at CBSA in receiving travel documents. The government feels that two things could perhaps be helpful: posit

Citizenship and Immigration committee  We can get those figures for you, Mr. Chair. It really happens during times of significant influx at the border. If you go back to the summer of 2017, when there were a number of people coming in, a portion were outside the eligibility period. We'll get the figure and share it wi

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes, I guess the best proxy we have, Mr. Chair, to figure out what's going to happen moving forward is looking back, and that's the 3,500 figure that the minister shared with the committee. A significant portion of those 3,500 would be irregular claimants. This applies not just t

Citizenship and Immigration committee  We're funded for the figures that we're assessing, so it's around that 3,500, but I think, Mr. Chair, much like we've done during the past couple of years, we would look at how to manage certain influxes, as we've done at Roxham Road—and the president of CBSA has realigned work,

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Maybe I'll just say a few words on the role of counsel, because I think that's part of your question. Counsel is allowed to assist the applicant in preparing for the hearing, to clarify questions and assist with responses, but is also able, at that hearing, to help clarify or cor

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I think, Mr. Chair, it just brings clarity as to the objective of these provisions, and it aligns with similar existing objectives in IRPA and simply states that the purpose of this is to maintain the integrity of Canada's asylum system. It's a contextual type of statement that i

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I think, Mr. Chair, that would be the answer.

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—

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes. But in your previous example, if they attempted to make a claim in Australia, they would not be allowed to, in that example. So they would not come through this cohort. If they were in the U.S. and made a claim, yes, they would apply to this cohort.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Mr. Chair, just to clarify a little bit, it is important to remember that when they come to Canada, we are assessing them under our international obligations. It's different from.... We're not sending them back to a country for adjudication. They are going through the PRRA proces