CIMM Committee Report

ENSURING THAT CANADA’S IMMIGRATION SYSTEM IS SECURE

SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT BY THE NDP OFFICIAL OPPOSITION

Jinny Sims, MP for Newton – North Delta

Sadia Groguhé, MP for Saint-Lambert

Rathika Sitsabaiesan, MP for Scarborough—Rouge River

Mylène Freeman, MP for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel  

For almost a year, the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration (CIMM) studied issues around the security of Canada’s immigration system. While witnesses presented relatively balanced views on the subject, regrettably the final report does not reflect this. For example, largely ignored by the report is witness testimony (and recommendations) that referenced a lack of resources and coordination at the Canadian Border Security Agency (CBSA) and Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC); testimony regarding alternatives to prison detention; criticisms of the government’s legislative approach; and improvements that could be made to Canada’s Temporary Resident Visa system.

Conservative cuts and mismanagement threaten Canadians safety

Many witnesses told the committee that the priority of the government should be addressing the lack of training, resources and integration of information and monitoring technologies within the responsible public service agencies. Unfortunately, exactly the opposite is happening under the Conservative government.

The May 2008 report of the Auditor General pointed to many problems with Canada’s detention and removal process – including incomplete information, inconsistent decisions, lack of monitoring and failure to manage costs effectively. Years later, a number of witnesses told the committee that these problems still exist.   

The 2012 Budget Plan announced cuts of $143 million to the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA). The government claims these cuts will not have an impact on our frontline services – but that is simply wishful thinking. We know that 325 jobs on the frontline of border crossings across the country will be cut and the intelligence branch of the CBSA has been hard hit - losing 100 positions and 19 sniffer dog units due to the budget reductions.

Canadians want us to stop criminals and terrorists before they arrive in in the country – however these cuts will mean that Canadian officials will have to try to do the best they can with less.  This is no way to keep Canadians safe from foreign criminals who will now have an easier time getting across our borders.

Misguided Conservative legislation on security and immigration

Failure to properly resource and integrate services vital to keeping Canadians safe led the government to instead focus on a highly punitive legislative approach to immigration and security. Conservatives introduced two pieces of legislation to reform the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) before this committee had been able to complete this study and offer recommendations.

As a result, these Bills – C-31 and C-43 – were ill-considered and will do more to punish victims of human trafficking, reduce due-process and concentrate power in the hands of the Minister than they will to keep Canadians safe. The NDP Official Opposition proposed a balanced approach based on evidence and consultation with stakeholders, but unfortunately sensible amendments to both bills were rejected by the Conservative majority.

C-31: “The Punishing Refugees Act”

Despite numerous expert witnesses telling our committee that Bill C-31 violates Canada’s international obligations, concentrates too much power in the hands of the Minister and will end up costing the provinces more in detention costs, Conservatives forged ahead with this mean-spirited legislation. The law will end up punishing legitimate refugees and the victims of human traffickers, without making Canadians any safer.

Witnesses argued that Canada already has very tough penalties for human smuggling and that measures proposed in Bill C-31 will only drive up the costs that human smugglers can charge and encourage them to use more dangerous routes into Canada, therefore putting lives at risk.  Others suggest that while the organizers stand to profit the most from human smuggling operations, they likely never come to Canada and may not be deterred by tougher measures for those who arrive as “irregular arrivals” as defined in C-31. The Committee heard that paying people for passage to a safe country is a last resort for many trying to escape persecution and that imposing penalties on the basis of mode of arrival is inconsistent with international law.

Witnesses also pointed to a myriad of other problems with C-31 - including the designation of “safe” countries and reduced timelines for appeals at the Refugee Appeal Division.  They predicted an increase in claimants representing themselves, material of poor quality being put before the IRB and consequent adjournments, and deserving refugees being denied and deported because they failed to present their case properly.

C-43: Increased arbitrary power for the Minister, less due process for permanent residents

Conservatives ignored expert testimony that pointed to a lack of resources and coordination at CIC and CBSA as the key reason that violent foreign criminals – in extreme cases – are able to stay in Canada despite deportation orders. Instead, they introduced Bill C-43 that focused on increasing arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister of Immigration and curbing due-process rights for permanent Canadian residents – many of whom have been here for years or even decades.

Alex Neve of Amnesty International Canada voiced one of the main concerns of those opposing the bill: “The restrictions on and removal of humanitarian relief, ministerial relief, and appeal rights,” should be withdrawn as they are means of ensuring human rights are protected. Witnesses described how these new provisions would adversely impact youth, minorities, those suffering from mental illness.

Most witnesses agreed that non-citizens who commit serious crimes in Canada should be dealt with quickly, but many were concerned that Bill C-43 would concentrate more arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister without check and balances. Opposition Members of the committee introduced a number of reasonable amendments to curb some of the legislation’s most problematic measures, but all were rejected by the government Members.

Alternatives to detention and jail for foreign nationals

While the report mentions alternatives to detention – and even recommends CBSA make greater use of them – much of the witness testimony in this area is missing.

During the study of Bill C-31, one witness mentioned that the European Union had moved away from child detention and had family-friendly alternatives, where reporting mechanisms provided sufficient control. Another witness stated that Sweden had developed supervised accommodations run by social workers which were also family friendly. An official from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) stated that an Australian parliamentary committee studied immigration detention and as a result of its March 2012 report, there was a move toward community detention and residential housing for children and families.

Witnesses recommended that CBSA develop similar programs to the Toronto Bail Program – a community-based supervision program for foreign nations – across the country. They urged CBSA to develop and implement a national, formal alternative to detention program.

A fairer, more secure system for issuing Temporary Resident Visas

The vast majority of newcomers and visitors to Canada are law-abiding people who want to build a better life for themselves and their families – even the Minister of Immigration admitted to as much during committee testimony. The Conservative government should spend more effort making sure they are treated fairly, have the resources they need and can be reunited with their families.

Canada’s system of Temporary Resident Visas, in many cases, allows families to be reunited for short periods of time and during major life events – such as weddings, births and funerals. Witness testimony that has been excluded from this report, indicates out that the system is badly broken and needs reforms to be fixed.

During the course of the study, some witnesses voiced concerns regarding the issuance of temporary visitor visas. One witness stated that rejection rates for visitor visas are too high at certain visa posts. Several witnesses testified that an applicant has a right to know detailed reasons for the refusal of a visa. One witness stated that the fact that a foreign national is not given the opportunity to refute the basis of the refusal violates procedural fairness. Further, he stated that the little time given for assessing the application may be efficient but not effective, in particular when the application presents security concerns.

Witnesses also recommended that CIC establish an appeal process for negative temporary resident visa decisions – something the NDP Official Opposition has proposed in a Private Member’s Bill.

Conclusion: Evidence-based approach to securing Canadians

 Protecting Canadians from security threats of all kinds is one of the primary responsibilities of the federal government. The expert testimony we heard during this study consistently showed that the best way to do this is to properly resource the appropriate public safety agencies.

In addition to cutting funding for border security, the Conservatives have also slashed hundreds of millions in funding to both the RCMP and Correctional Services Canada and have offered no funds to help with front-line policing needs. In fact, the government has refused to renew the Police Officer Recruitment Fund (PORF) which runs out in 2013. Any police that were hired as part of the program will no longer be funded and municipalities and provinces will have to make up the shortfall.

To achieve an immigration system is both fair and secure, the Conservative government should abandon its ill-considered legislative approach and instead make sure Canada’s border guards, immigration officials and police officers have the resources they need to keep us safe.