CIM#55: Inquiring about the challenges faced by Afghans with the Foreign Affairs Minister and officials

"In the minister's introduction, she talked about the laws that need to be changed. The bill has been introduced. Recommendation 11 of the Afghanistan special committee calls for the government to “review the anti-terrorism financing provisions under the Criminal Code and urgently take any legislative steps necessary to ensure those provisions do not unduly restrict legitimate humanitarian action that complies with international humanitarian principles and law.”


Doctors Without Borders has raised a concern. They do not support the changes tabled by the government. They are instead encouraging the government to enact a full humanitarian exemption, as recommended by their committee. They say the idea that someone could be charged with a crime for providing medical care to a patient in a hospital during a conflict is ridiculous and out of step with the international humanitarian law that explicitly prohibits punishing a person for upholding medical ethics:

The legislation proposed by Canada today requires humanitarian organizations to seek permission from the Canadian government before we send medical staff to respond to some humanitarian crises—what happens if they say no? Do we walk away from maternity hospitals or primary health clinics? The Geneva Conventions and International Humanitarian Law clearly state that countries have an obligation to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian assistance and a duty to not criminalize the work performed according to medical ethics, yet that's exactly what this legislation does.

That's a quote from Jason Nickerson, humanitarian representative to Canada, Doctors Without Borders.

My question to the minister is this: Why didn't the government put in the full humanitarian exemption?”

Citizenship and Immigration Committee on March 22nd, 2023
Evidence of meeting #55 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session.
 
 
5:15 p.m.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I thank the minister and her officials for being here today.

In the minister's introduction, she talked about the laws that need to be changed. The bill has been introduced. Recommendation 11 of the Afghanistan special committee calls for the government to “review the anti-terrorism financing provisions under the Criminal Code and urgently take any legislative steps necessary to ensure those provisions do not unduly restrict legitimate humanitarian action that complies with international humanitarian principles and law.”

Doctors Without Borders has raised a concern. They do not support the changes tabled by the government. They are instead encouraging the government to enact a full humanitarian exemption, as recommended by their committee. They say the idea that someone could be charged with a crime for providing medical care to a patient in a hospital during a conflict is ridiculous and out of step with the international humanitarian law that explicitly prohibits punishing a person for upholding medical ethics:

The legislation proposed by Canada today requires humanitarian organizations to seek permission from the Canadian government before we send medical staff to respond to some humanitarian crises—what happens if they say no? Do we walk away from maternity hospitals or primary health clinics? The Geneva Conventions and International Humanitarian Law clearly state that countries have an obligation to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian assistance and a duty to not criminalize the work performed according to medical ethics, yet that's exactly what this legislation does.

That's a quote from Jason Nickerson, humanitarian representative to Canada, Doctors Without Borders.

My question to the minister is this: Why didn't the government put in the full humanitarian exemption?


Mélanie Joly Ahuntsic-Cartierville, QC
Liberal

That is the question your colleague Alexis was asking me before, Jenny.

Our goal was to make sure we could balance the questions of having a strong stance and not funding any form of terrorist organization while making sure we support humanitarian aid in Afghanistan.

If you and this committee have good recommendations to make, we will obviously study them, as we did during the Afghanistan study. We want to work with humanitarian organizations because we want this to work. Of course, we value Doctors Without Borders. This is a well-known organization in my home province. We will continue to make sure that we can support them, that they can benefit from Canada's humanitarian aid, and, at the same time, that they can help the very Afghan people who need their support in dire circumstances.

While I am saying this to you, my colleague, the Minister of International Development, is the one who can go into much more detail on this aspect. He will obviously have my full support.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you, Minister.

The whole Afghanistan issue is a whole-of-government endeavour. I remember that at the Afghanistan committee, when we asked this question of the Minister of International Development, he said that it wasn't him and that we should go talk to the justice department. Everybody bounced the ball around and said, “Not me,” so here we are.

We have a piece of legislation, and it falls short and is not consistent with the recommendations. I guess the takeaway here, which I think I'm happy to hear in part, is this: Maybe the government is open to amendments to see how we can adjust this, because Doctors Without Borders are clearly saying that this is not going to work. If it's not going to work, then we need to do better. We're already slow to the game, truth be told, and for many people who needed aid and help, Canada was not there, while other countries made it.

I'm going to park it there, but I do want to flag it, and I think that organizations and NGOs also flagged it to say that consultation was not done very well. With all this time that's passed, they also flagged that concern. We'll have more time to get to it when the legislation gets into the committee stage for debate, I am sure.

I want to turn for a minute to the issue around Afghans who have been left behind. There are many who have worked for GAC and there are many who have been supported by GAC, funded by the Canadian government. These are NGOs and particularly organizations that supported women and fought for women's rights and democracy, and they've been left behind. This arbitrary number of 40,000 came from I don't know where.

Will the minister support lifting that arbitrary number so more of the people who participated and worked with Canada can get to safety?


Mélanie Joly Ahuntsic-Cartierville, QC
Liberal

I'll say a couple things. To finish off the last point, we've been providing help to the Afghan people in the form of $150 million, so it's not as if we didn't do anything. We have done things and we will do more, so that's one point.

On the question of amendments, Jenny, we're always open to see what can be done and we value your work. You can always count on me to have good discussions to improve legislation. I think the fact that the Minister of Justice, the Minister of International Development and the Minister of Public Safety made this announcement together shows how much coordination there has been among the three of them.

On the question of Afghans wanting to come to Canada, I think 40,000 is a big number and an ambitious target, but I think it's important that we achieve that target, and now we're at three-quarters of it. Nearly 30,000 Afghan people have come to Canada, and I think that Canadians have answered in a heartwarming way, as Canadians do, by opening their hearts and their homes to make sure Afghan people could come to Canada.

Thank you.
5:35 p.m.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

I'd like to turn to the issue of helping get people out of Afghanistan. Many people are stuck.

I maintain that the government needs to lift the arbitrary quota. There are many people who were funded by GAC, the Canadian government, who have been left behind. I have, literally, spreadsheet upon spreadsheet of people who followed the government's instructions to try to get an application and to get a referral and could not do so, and they are in a dire situation right now. I'm going to set this aside for a minute.

One of the issues, of course, is getting people out of Afghanistan, as well as some who have made it to a third country, such as Pakistan. Pakistan issued an edict back in December of last year to say that if you have an expired visa, you will either be arrested and put in jail or sent back to Afghanistan.

From this perspective, with regard to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the work that the minister and her officials are doing, what are the minister and her department doing to work with these third countries to allow for people to get out?

If they don't have a valid visa, they're not going to get an exit visa either. What work is being done to alleviate that problem?


Mélanie Joly Ahuntsic-Cartierville, QC
Liberal

There are two answers to your two questions.

Jenny, I'm a very pragmatic person. My goal is to get to 40,000, and I'm convinced that we can get there. If more work needs to be done, we will do more work. I will work with my colleague, the Minister of Immigration, to see what can be done. Indeed, to your point, the situation in Afghanistan will continue to be dire.

The second answer to your question is.... I think your question is very relevant. The issue right now is that Afghanistan is a really difficult country for us to operate in. We don't have an ambassador right now. There is nobody at our embassy. The issue we have is, indeed, safe passage.

That's exactly what I do when I deal with Pakistan, when I deal with Qatar, when I deal with the UAE and when I deal with Kuwait. How can we make sure that Afghans leaving Afghanistan who have an opportunity to come to Canada can come to Canada? That's my job, and that's what I do.
6:15 p.m.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP


Thank you.

With regard to special immigration for interpreters and collaborators, the government announced a new measure for cultural advisers after being sued by family members who had loved ones left behind. That special immigration measure only targets those who worked for the Department of National Defence in Afghanistan between 2001 and 2021. Those who worked for Canada in actuality but worked under NATO or ISAF are not qualified for this program.

Does the department know how many of our cultural advisers who worked for NATO or ISAF are in that category?


Weldon Epp
Assistant Deputy Minister, Asia, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

Madame Chair, I don't think we know the answer to that question.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Is that something that officials can find out and report back to the committee?


Weldon Epp
Assistant Deputy Minister, Asia, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development


We'd be happy to endeavour to do so.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you so much. I think it would be important.

It doesn't make sense, right? These are people who are obviously a part of the important work they're doing, and Canada, of course, is a part of NATO, so I would appreciate that. Hopefully, there will be some changes to ensure that those families get to safety.

I want to get back to the question that I asked of the minister with respect to the legislation, and you've heard my comments about Doctors Without Borders. I'd like to get the officials' response to that.


Weldon Epp
Assistant Deputy Minister, Asia, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development


Jennifer, do you want to take this one?


Jennifer Loten
Director General, International Crime and Terrorism, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development


Sure.

The legislation was presented in Parliament fairly recently. It'll go through the process, and I think we'll be looking at how it applies. Organizations that have been part of the process and that have been working with us to develop these solutions will obviously have reactions. We're very interested in hearing what those are so that we can get a look at how we can implement this amendment so that it does the work that we intend it to do. I used the word “enabling” a moment ago, and I'll use it again. Our intention is to make sure that these organizations can do the excellent work that we want them to do, and we've been working hand in hand with them over the course of the process of review to make sure that it does that.

However, I would say that the way it's set up at the moment, and the reason that it's not simply a humanitarian carve-out, is that it does enable a broader category of engagement than what would simply be envisioned in a humanitarian carve-out, so we can work, in this case, on education, on health care, on livelihood issues. It's all spelled out in the legislation at the moment. We look forward to hearing from stakeholder organizations what their reactions are to this, and we hope to continue to work in partnership with them so that it works the way it's intended to.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Would officials be able to table, for this committee, the list of stakeholder groups consulted on this bill?


Jennifer Loten
Director General, International Crime and Terrorism, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

I think we can do that. We want to be a bit careful about the organizations, though. There are security issues. This is not the case at the moment, but it will become so when the legislation comes into play.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you. We will, of course, be mindful of that. It will be kept confidential.

I'd also like to canvass the officials with this question: What work is being done with third countries to help, for example, Afghans at risk—those being hunted by the Taliban—get to safety?

I understand that officials and the minister may not be able to say, “This is what we're doing”, because if it's put out there, it might shut the system down. However, could officials advise that work under way—or done—is actually bringing people to safety? Is that still in operation, at the moment?


Weldon Epp
Assistant Deputy Minister, Asia, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development


Could I clarify that we're referring to work that facilitates exit from Afghanistan, then safe passage onward?


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

That's correct.

It's also about work for people who don't have a valid visa. For obvious reasons, they can't go to the Taliban and say, “Hey, give me a bunch of visas.” Soldiers would put a bull's eye right on their forehead.

How are we helping those individuals ?


Weldon Epp
Assistant Deputy Minister, Asia, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development


Madam Chair, the broad answer is this: Through the partnerships we have with Pakistan and the UAE, and working with the United States and others, we'll continue to provide screening we can't do on-site in Afghanistan. This allows us to address valid security and identification issues, knowing many people are fleeing without passports. They're not fleeing with proper identification. That's why we're positioned and are working with partners to do biometric screening in third countries, which allows us to then facilitate onward movement.

For example, a charter flight arrived earlier today in Vancouver—or was it late last night? Another 368 Afghan refugees have just come in. That work is ongoing, to answer your question.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Does that include people who don't have valid visas? Are any people arriving without valid visas?


Weldon Epp
Assistant Deputy Minister, Asia, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development


Do you mean valid visas for Canada?


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

No, I mean valid visas for the third country—Pakistan, or wherever they are.


Weldon Epp
Assistant Deputy Minister, Asia, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development


I understand.

This includes working with our partners to facilitate, as smoothly as possible, the exit from third countries of individuals eligible for the programs we offer. We recognize, particularly in the case of Pakistan, and to the point the member raised earlier, that there are pressures in some of these communities because they may be overstaying the visas they have, and the Government of Pakistan has chosen, as is its right, to apply fines. We continue to have conversations with governments, including the Government of Pakistan, and we have no evidence to date that these individuals are being refouled or sent back to Afghanistan, so we will continue to work with Pakistan to provide the pathways to allow them to transition, even if they've overstayed or have to pay fines before they can come to Canada.
6:40 p.m.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you.

I raise this question because the Minister of Immigration was on record as saying that if you don't have a valid visa, you would not be considered as having a valid application in Canada. I hope that position has changed, because by nature, people who are refugees and fleeing persecution are not going to necessarily have valid papers. That cannot be a reason that they can't be considered for an application to get to safety, so I hope the department will work with the ministry of immigration to work through this, because that does not make any sense.

Can I get the officials to provide to committee information on how many individuals, particularly women's organizations, received funding from GAC or the Canadian government in advancing rights? How many of those individuals are there?

Of those, how many received a referral from GAC towards the 40,000 special immigration measure?


Weldon Epp
Assistant Deputy Minister, Asia, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development


Thank you for the question.

I'm going to try to answer. I have some data here, so bear with me. I'll provide what I can.

For the first part of the question, with respect, I don't think we'll be able to answer in the sense of.... Given the decades that Canada has worked in the country, a full list of all the beneficiaries of the programming we did would be an enormous list.

What we are working on in the role that GAC has played is that as referrals come forward, either through third parties or directly, we assess those criteria. Of those, Global Affairs has been able to refer thousands to IRCC—


The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

I'm sorry for interrupting. Time is up for Ms. Kwan. Please wrap up.


Weldon Epp
Assistant Deputy Minister, Asia, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development


I believe, Madam Chair, that we'd be happy to provide the data in terms of how many referrals have been made and for how many of those referrals IRCC has been able to offer invitations to apply.

We can provide that data. I'd be happy to do so not on your time.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

I wonder if I can ask the officials, Madam Chair, if they can try to see if they can get the data, as much as they can—


The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

Mr. Epp has said that he will try to provide it.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

—on how many organizations received funding from GAC as far back as they can go and on how many people who worked for GAC received funding.
https://openparliament.ca/committees/immigration/44-1/55/jenny-kwan-1/

Latest posts

CIMM#115: Pension Transferability and Access to Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), and Delays in Permanent Residence and Visas for Hong Kongers Recent Reforms to the International Student Program

James McNamee, Director General, Family and Social Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I would say that's generally the case. If the work permit they obtained was originally connected to the public policy, that's correct. I don't know if that's the situation in all cases. In some cases, applicants may have had an LMIA-based work permit to begin with.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC, NDP
That's right. However, under the special immigration measure, the LMIA is not required.  I have a list of applicants in those circumstances. Their work permit renewal application was rejected. They were asked to submit an LMIA, which makes no sense. I want to flag that as a deep concern now emerging for people whose open work permits are being rejected as they wait for their permanent resident status. At this rate, given the immigration levels plan numbers and the processing delays happening, and with the number of applicants in place, you can imagine that it's going to take something like eight years to get through the backlog of people getting their PR status. This means that if they are trying to get their pension, they will not be able to do so for eight years, because they are required to provide proof of permanent residence.
I want to flag this as a major concern. I hope the department will take action to fix the error being applied to applicants whose open work permits are being rejected under this stream.  Can I get a confirmation from officials that this will be undertaken?

James McNamee, Director General, Family and Social Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Yes, that issue has been raised with the department already, and we're looking into it to see what exactly happened in those situations.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC, NDP
Okay. Officials are aware of it, and yet it's still happening.  I have cases coming to me that are happening. I'm about to prepare a giant pile of this stuff for the minister, so I hope the officials will fix that.  The other thing related to the pension, of course, is lengthy delays for people to get their permanent status.  Based on the immigration levels plan and the number of applicants in place, is it the officials' anticipation that it will take about eight years to get those applications processed?

James McNamee, Director General, Family and Social Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
We have looked at that possibility. Certainly, it will take longer than we had previously indicated to the committee. I would note that the first year of the levels plan is the fixed year. The years that follow, in this case, 2026 and 2027, are flexible. There are opportunities to adjust those numbers in the future, and that could affect that timeline. It's hard to say whether eight years will be the timeline, but it will be longer than had been originally predicted because the numbers have gone down.

CIMM#114: Recent Reforms to the International Student Program

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
Aside from looking at patterns of potential violators—the groups and organizations taking advantage of students with these fraudulent letters of acceptance—will you be including in the analysis what types of institutions are being utilized for these fraudulent letters? In other words, is it private institutions versus public institutions, colleges versus universities and so on? Will that be part of the analysis?

Bronwyn MayDirector General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
It's not always the case that a letter originates from an institution. We would need to look at various possible sources.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
Maybe I can reframe that.
Obviously, as these are fraudulent letters of acceptance, they wouldn't be issued by the institutions. However, regarding the list of institutions being used for the purpose of these fraudulent letters, I would be interested in obtaining information to determine what percentage are private institutions and public institutions, how many of them are colleges, how many of them are universities and so on. That will tell us very specific information that I think is important when trying to tackle fraudulent activities.

Bronwyn May, Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I completely agree. That's a very important line of analysis.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
I will make the further request to make sure you share this information with the committee. I'll argue that this information should not be kept secret. It should be public and transparent—shared with all Canadians—so that we're aware of what the landscape is and of how international students are being taken advantage of. With respect to that analysis, will there be information and data on what countries are being targeted?

Click to read the full discussion from the Committee meeting

CIMM#113: Pension Transferability and Access to Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), and Delays in Permanent Residence and Visas for Hong Kongers

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
All right. Thank you.
Hence, we have this problem. You have the Canadian government, which created this lifeboat scheme for Hong Kongers who are fleeing persecution in Hong Kong as a result of the national security law. The government, in its wisdom or lack thereof, created this lifeboat scheme that only provides for temporary residence by way of a work permit or a study permit. Then these people have to go to the queue to make an application for permanent residence, and we know that there is a huge backlog and delay in processing.
In the beginning, there was swift action, but as time has passed, it's been lengthened by way of the delay, to the point where the former minister even made an announcement to further extend people's work permits and study permits for another three years. That is to say, a person could be here for six years—as long as six years—under this current scheme without getting permanent residence. This is because the minister anticipated that people would not be able to swiftly get their permanent resident status. That is the reality.
As a result of that, people are not able to provide proof of permanent residence, because the application is in process. To make it even worse, the government—the minister—just made an announcement about the levels plan, cutting levels to the tune of 105,000 permanent resident status applications.
You can imagine how long the wait-list is for Hong Kongers as they continue to wait. Now, these Hong Kongers have zero intention of returning to Hong Kong, because they know that they would be persecuted if they did. People know that. I think the Canadian government knows that.
This is my question, then, to you as the manager of their pension, which, because of this rule, they're unable to access: Would your organization be willing to write to the regulator to ask for consideration for these applicants who are in a prolonged period of waiting for permanent resident status, to ask that their declaration indicating that they do not intend to return to Hong Kong be accepted as proof that they intend to leave Hong Kong permanently so that they can access their pensions? Is that something that your organization would consider doing?

Maryscott GreenwoodGlobal Head, Government Relations, The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company
I think I understand the question.
The basic premise of your question has to do with the period of time it takes for the Government of Canada to determine and provide permanent residency or citizenship. It seems to me that this is a function of the Government of Canada, as opposed to a regulated entity. That's how I would answer that.

Laura HewittSenior Vice-President and Head, Global Government Affairs and Public Policy, Sun Life Financial Services of Canada Inc.
Yes. I would say that it's not within our authority to change the criteria.
However, our numbers show that once that permanent residency does come through, we're able to process the applications and approve Canadian permanent residents.

Are you ready to take action?

Constituent Resources
Mobile Offices
Contact Jenny

Sign up for updates