1. News
  2. OPEN LETTER: Calling for Change in Policy Directive of 1000 Application Cap to the Special Family Reunification Program for Gaza

OPEN LETTER: Calling for Change in Policy Directive of 1000 Application Cap to the Special Family Reunification Program for Gaza

Many civil society groups and stakeholders have been vocal in their condemnation of an arbitrary application cap for over a week. Many feel the cap was unfair and discriminatory when they look to other temporary special immigration measures, such as the CUAET measure for Ukraine, that have not arbitrarily limited applications.

The confusion caused by the public policy and the unfortunate delay in clarification created tense conditions for the Palestinian-Canadian community. To many families, these applications mean the difference between the life and death. Not knowing when the online portal would open but understanding that spots are limited caused many people to stay awake through the night, continually refreshing the application portal to not miss the chance for a spot. I know you agree that Palestinian- Canadians have endured enough and do not need their anxieties needlessly exacerbated.

            

January 10, 2024

The Honourable Marc Miller
Minister of Citizenship and Immigration House of Commons
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6
Via email: [email protected]

 

Re: Open letter calling for change in policy directive of 1,000 application cap to the special family reunification program for Gaza

Dear Minister Miller,

The horrendous conditions facing Gazan civilians and the desire of their Canadian family members to ensure their safety warrants the special immigration measures that were announced on December 21st, 2023. The initiative of Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to commit to this important program was imperative, but the execution has been flawed.

I wrote to you on January 4th, 2024, to share these concerns and to urge you to lift the arbitrary cap on applications that was widely understood to be imposed on the family reunification program. You clarified in an interview yesterday that there is not a hard cap of 1,000 applications and that IRCC will “remain flexible on the fly” if applications exceed this number. These statements contradict the written policy directive of December 22nd signed by you that states:

“The exemptions for foreign nationals who meet the conditions listed in Part 1 and Part 2 will expire once 1,000 applications have been accepted into processing or one year after the public policy comes into effect, whichever comes first.”

The policy directive goes on to say: “This temporary public policy may be revoked at any time, without notice.”

As you know, officials can only act in accordance with the government’s public policy directive. It would be imperative that the language regarding the cap be struck along with the sentence “This temporary public policy may be revoked at any time, without notice.”

I expect IRCC to evaluate the volume of applications internally and transparently for the public as often as it is appropriate to do so, but the cap that was imposed had no reason to be part of this process. Your explanation in the media came late and is not sufficient. Your announcement of the cap on applications for this special measure has already caused tremendous stress and anxiety for Palestinian-Canadians, who understood that they were being made to compete with each other for a scarcity of applications. Such hardship was easily avoidable.

Many civil society groups and stakeholders have been vocal in their condemnation of an arbitrary application cap for over a week. Many feel the cap was unfair and discriminatory when they look to other temporary special immigration measures, such as the CUAET measure for Ukraine, that have not arbitrarily limited applications.

The confusion caused by the public policy and the unfortunate delay in clarification created tense conditions for the Palestinian-Canadian community. To many families, these applications mean the difference between the life and death. Not knowing when the online portal would open but understanding that spots are limited caused many people to stay awake through the night, continually refreshing the application portal to not miss the chance for a spot. I know you agree that Palestinian- Canadians have endured enough and do not need their anxieties needlessly exacerbated.

In addition, I call on you to also strike the sentence that “This temporary public policy may be revoked at any time, without notice.” The public has the right to know in advance when the public policy will end. To say it could be eliminated at any time without notice is contrary to a government that claims to be open, accountable, and transparent.

Thank you in advance for your urgent attention and consideration. 

Sincerely,

Jenny Kwan
Member of Parliament for Vancouver East

 

Latest posts

National Post: 'Not informed': Mélanie Joly tells inquiry she was kept in the dark for years on foreign interference

Earlier this week, current national security and intelligence adviser Nathalie Drouin said she had seen no evidence there are “traitors” in Parliament and that some of the conclusions in the NSICOP report made her “very uncomfortable.”

Mendicino said he believes there is a need to “clear the air” about NSICOP’s findings.

“I am very worried that the entire conversation around foreign interference and parliamentarians is being transformed into a kangaroo court with very little regard for the process of understanding how we assess intelligence,” he told the inquiry.

“I think it is extremely important that we heed the opinion and the evidence that has been given to this commission, from Ms. Drouin, from CSIS, around the fact that… this NSICOP report has gone further than where they are at in the assessment of the intelligence,” he added.

CBC: Joly says she wasn't briefed on foreign interference for over a year

Under questioning by Sujit Choudhry, lawyer for NDP MP Jenny Kwan, Mendicino agreed that officials need to clear the air on foreign interference and parliamentarians.

"I am very worried that the entire conversation around foreign interference and parliamentarians is being transformed into a kangaroo court, with very little regard for the process of understanding how we assess intelligence, especially given its rapidly evolving nature," he said.

CBC: Bill Blair's former chief of staff rejects claims of political motive behind 54-day warrant delay

 

Sujit Choudhry, lawyer for NDP MP Jenny Kwan, asked why Astravas had asked for a briefing on Vanweenan lists in connection with that warrant when she would have seen similar lists attached to previous warrant applications handled by Blair's office. 

"Did you recognize any of the names on that list?" asked Choudhry. "As you can appreciate, I can't discuss the contents of a Vanweenan list or a specific warrant in this forum and I have spoken with the commission about this," responded Astravas.

Despite Astravas being peppered with questions about the delay in arranging for Blair to be briefed and to sign the warrant, by the end of her testimony, it still wasn't clear why it took so long. Two other warrants that were applied for during that time period were signed with delays of only a few days and Blair had a number of secure conversations with the director of CSIS during that period.

Astravas revealed that Blair was aware of the foreign interference investigation that triggered the warrant before CSIS submitted the application.

More

Are you ready to take action?

Constituent Resources
Mobile Offices
Contact Jenny

Sign up for updates

Vancouver Constituency Office

Email:
Phone: 604-775-5800
Address:
2572 E Hastings
Vancouver, BC, V5K 1Z3

Ottawa Parliamentary Office

Email:
Phone: 613-992-6030
Address:
House of Commons
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6
(postage-free)