I'd like to ask the representative from LUSO Community Services this question. You raised, I think similarly to the other witnesses, the significance of the delay in processing and what it means. Oftentimes, the government does not even follow its own processing standards. If you look at the website right now, they don't even give you a time; they only say not to expect your application to be processed expeditiously.
Given that this is the situation, I wonder what you think the government should do or what your recommendation is for the government to address this crisis in processing delays within immigration.
FINA#147: Bill C-69 on Concerns Around Expanding Immigration Detention into Federal Prisons
Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I will speak to it very briefly.
As I was indicating, on March 13, over 80 civil societies, settlement agencies and religious organizations wrote a strongly worded letter to the Prime Minister with their concerns around expanding immigration detention into federal prisons.
Earlier today, the provisions around setting up this format were passed, but with that being said, this amendment is an attempt by the NDP to at least try to put some parameters within that framework, to have “high risk” clearly defined in legislation rather than leaving it up to regulation and having it be defined behind closed doors.
To that end, Mr. Chair, that's what the amendment seeks to do. The definition of “high risk” is really meant to provide some limitations around what would be deemed as high risk in this instance.
Mr. Chair, I just want to highlight a couple of elements within that. I won't, of course, read the entire amendment into the record here.
Really, we attempted to put some parameters there as to the nature and level of danger to the public the person poses related to, for example, any conviction to do with sexual offences or an offence involving violence or weapons and for the same conviction outside of Canada. As well, there are provisions with regard to pending charges for these offences. Also, we wanted to put parameters around engagement with terrorism or gang activities and such.
Mr. Chair, I think these are some of the provisions for declaring what is deemed to be “high risk” in that context.
The other thing worth noting here is that we're also adding to this with an amendment around mental health; when considering these matters, the mental health aspect of the individual should also be taken into consideration. That's written within the amendment here.
Of course, there are some accountability measures related to it, which means that when someone is to be detained, there has to be some level of accountability with respect to written notice advising the individual as such and then, of course, allowing the individual to undertake representation if they seek to do so.
That's a quick summary of where it is at in terms of trying to put these parameters in place.
