CIM#34: What government should do to address the processing delays crisis

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.

Citizenship and Immigration Committee
Oct. 7th, 2022, 2:20 pm
Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses as well for their presentations. I apologize for the delay in getting the matter going.

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.



Irena Sompaseuth
Settlement Services Manager, LUSO Community Services

Well, I think consistency with processing times.... I think a few of the witnesses mentioned that there is inconsistency, because some applications are processed faster than others, not really for any particular reason, and that communication is not available to applicants.

As I mentioned, we have seen recent applications being processed much faster compared to 2019 and 2020, so just keep that trend going but really focus on the backlog of all those applications that are sitting in the inventory as well. I think allocating staff and resources to specific applications and focusing on getting those processed will help reduce that backlog, as well as training for staff and hiring more staff to be available so applicants will be able to receive information.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Of course, when the government says they've hired new staff and set processing standards, it's for new applicants coming in from that day going forward. It's not for the people who are already in the queue who have already been waiting for a year, two years or longer for their application to be processed.

Do you think that's right? If not, how do you think the government should address that, those who have already applied and are waiting?



Irena Sompaseuth
Settlement Services Manager, LUSO Community Services

With all of the new employees who have been hired to focus and work on all the immigration applications with the goal of reducing the backlogs, there should be designated teams, separate teams, to focus on specific issues. That way, the older applications would also be processed and not just left in the inventory without attention.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you.

I'd like to ask the same question of Ms. Gagné. I'm sure you're seeing that in the system. What's your response? Should the government be processing new applications and then be able to say, “Oh, look, we're meeting standards”, when all the people who are stuck in the backlog are just waiting and waiting?



Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe
Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ

The government should really set a deadline for dealing with the backlog. For example, it could decide that all backlogs have to be cleared within six months and hire the resources needed to administer the process.

At the moment, resources are assigned to processing new files. However, applications and the backlog are not always being dealt with, and 20% of applications are not being processed within the prescribed time periods. We have no idea what's going on.

There should therefore be very clear direction from the government requiring all backlogs to be processed within something like six months. After that, there should be an accountability requirement if the deadline is not met.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much for that.

Is my time up, Madam Chair?

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

You have one minute and 10 seconds.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you.

One of the issues is the lack of transparency, really. People don't really know why their application has just been rejected. Often the government just cites, “We don't believe you're going to return to your country of origin”, even though there's ample evidence to indicate otherwise.

Ms. Gagné, I wonder what your response is to that and what your recommendation is to address this issue.



Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe
Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ

First of all, I would recommend that the reasons be more detailed. At the moment, generic and highly subjective reasons are given. We don't understand why. When we submit an access to information request, we never get any further details.

Officers' notes should therefore be clearly detailed and the reasons given need to be explained at greater length. It's not enough to say in a short sentence that the officer did not believe the applicants would return to their country owing to their financial status. Details about what precisely is missing from the application are needed to answer questions or address officers' concerns. At the moment, the same application might be submitted twice and receive a different response depending on which officer processed it.

The reasons really need to be spelled out and clear instructions given with respect to what is required. For example, for financial means, a definition of the minimum required has to be identified and communicated clearly. At the moment, it's up to the discretion of the officer, and there are no guidelines.
https://openparliament.ca/committees/immigration/44-1/34/jenny-kwan-10/

Latest posts

CIMM#93: Closed Work Permits and Temporary Foreign Workers and Briefing on Recent Changes to International Student Policy and Plans for Future Measures

On the question around student housing, I absolutely think that it is essential for institutions and provinces do their part and I think that the federal government should show leadership and perhaps initiate a program wherein the federal government contributes a third of the funding, institutions provide a third of the funding, and the provinces and territories provide a third of the funding towards the creation of student housing, both for international students and domestic students. That way you can have a robust plan to address the housing needs of the students.

I'm going to park that for a minute and quickly get into the students who were subject to fraud. We have a situation in which students have now been cleared and found to be genuine by the task force, but they have not gotten their passports back yet. I don't know what the holdup is, and I wonder if the minister can comment on that.

Second, there are students who are still waiting to be evaluated by the task force, and the task force work can't proceed because they might be waiting for a date for the IRB to assess the question on their permit on whether or not it was genuine or whether or not there was misrepresentation. They are consequently in a situation in which people are just chasing their tails and they can't get to the task force.

On that question, will the minister agree that instead of making people go through that process with the IRB, the task force evaluation can move forward first so that they can be found to be either a genuine student or not a genuine student?

 

CIMM#92: Closed Work Permits, Temporary Foreign Workers and Committee Business

I want to thank the special rapporteur for joining us today at committee. I also very much appreciate your coming to Canada and looking into this issue.

As many of the witnesses have said to us, the issue around the immigration system as it's set up, with the closed work permit approach, is that it actually sets these workers up for exploitation. From that perspective.... It's not to say, as the Conservatives would suggest, that you were alleging that all employers abuse workers. I don't believe you said that at any point in time; rather, I think the issue is about the immigration system that Canada has.

Instead of having this closed work permit situation, what would you say is the remedy to address the exploitation that many of the migrant workers you spoke with directly experienced?

 

Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, United Nations, As an Individual
Tomoya Obokata

My recommendation is, certainly, to modify the closed nature of the program. If the workers are able to choose their employers at their own will, that reduces the instances of abuse and exploitation.

More importantly, whether it's closed or not, employers have to comply with the relevant legal obligations. I accept that a large number of employers already do. It's those others who do not who require further attention from the provincial and federal governments to see whether they can take appropriate law enforcement actions against those who breach labour standards legislation.

 

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

With respect to exploitation, one of the issues that migrant workers are faced with is that they don't have full status here in Canada; they have only temporary status. One issue that has been identified is the closed work permit. The other issue is in terms of having rights. Being able to have their rights protected also means that they have to have status here in Canada.

How would you suggest the policy side of things should be amended to ensure that these migrant workers have their rights protected?

CIMM#91: Government's Response to the Final Report of the Special Committee on Afghanistan and Committee Business

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I thank the committee members for supporting the last motion.

I have another motion that I'd like to move at this point. Notice has been given for it. It reads as follows:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee invite the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship and the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities and relevant officials together for two hours, or invite the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship with relevant officials for two hours, and the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities to appear separately with relevant officials for one hour to update the committee on:

(a) the work of the task force addressing the exploitation scheme targeting international students as many students are still reporting that they are in limbo and have not heard back from officials about their status;

(b) the measures taken by IRCC and institutions to help prevent and protect international students from fraud schemes;

(c) the justification to increase the financial requirements for international students by more than 100% to $20,635;

(d) the justification for putting a cap on international study permits; and

(e) the plans to address the housing crisis for international students and efforts made to collaborate with provinces, territories and post-secondary institutions.

I think the motion is self-explanatory on all elements, and I think we would benefit from having the two ministers appear before our committee. We've also deliberated this issue at length at another meeting, so in the interest of time, I won't revisit all of those points.

I hope committee members will support this motion.

 

Are you ready to take action?

Constituent Resources
Mobile Offices
Contact Jenny

Sign up for updates