CIMM Committee Meeting

Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.

For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.

If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.

Previous day publication Next day publication

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Wednesday, February 12, 2003

1345

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill, Canadian Alliance))

Ms. Lois Berrigan (Settlement Coordinator, Association for New Canadians)

1350

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lloydetta Quaicoe (President, Multicultural Women's Organization of Newfoundland and Labrador)

1355

1400

1405

1410

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lloydetta Quaicoe

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Purnima Sen (President, Newfoundland & Labrador Health in Pluralistic Societies)

1415

1420

1425

1430

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Donna Jeffrey (Refugee Immigrants Advisory Council)

1435

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Donna Jeffrey

1440

1445

1450

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval Centre, BQ)

1455

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

1500

Ms. Purnima Sen

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Donna Jeffrey

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Donna Jeffrey

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Mr. Jerry Pickard (Chatham—Kent Essex, Lib.)

1505

1510

1515

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Purnima Sen

Mr. Jerry Pickard

1520

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lois Berrigan

Mr. Jerry Pickard

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lois Berrigan

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lois Berrigan

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lois Berrigan

1525

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lois Berrigan

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lois Berrigan

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lois Berrigan

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

1530

Ms. Lois Berrigan

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lois Berrigan

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lloydetta Quaicoe

1535

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Lloydetta Quaicoe

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Purnima Sen

1540

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Donna Jeffrey

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Donna Jeffrey

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

1545

Ms. Donna Jeffrey

Ms. Lloydetta Quaicoe

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Donna Jeffrey

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Mr. Nick Summers (As Individual)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Mr. Nick Summers

1600

1605

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral

Mr. Nick Summers

1610

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral

Mr. Nick Summers

1615

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral

Mr. Nick Summers

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Mr. Nick Summers

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Mr. Jerry Pickard

1620

Mr. Nick Summers

1625

Mr. Jerry Pickard

Mr. Nick Summers

Mr. Jerry Pickard

Mr. Nick Summers

1630

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Mr. Nick Summers

1635

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

Mr. Nick Summers

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy)

CANADA

Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration

NUMBER 027

2nd SESSION

37th PARLIAMENT

EVIDENCE

Wednesday, February 12, 2003

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

· (1345)

[Translation]

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill, Canadian Alliance)): I'll call the meeting to order.

[NOTE: Due to technical difficulties this translation is derived from the interpretation]

To start things off, I'd like to welcome the witnesses this afternoon who are here to discuss with us settlement and integration programs for immigrants to Canada. As you can see from the list, this group of individuals has extensive expertise in this area. In fact the witnesses represent four separate organization in St. John's. We have asked them to share with us information and comments they they deem relevant to this matter. I would ask each one of you to limit your remarks to ten minutes. This will give us more time to engage in a debate and to ask questions. I note that you have provided us with written submissions and these will indeed prove useful. The first witness, Ms. Berrigan, represents the Association of New Canadians. You have the floor, Ms. Berrigan.

[End of translation]

Ms. Lois Berrigan (Settlement Coordinator, Association for New Canadians): Good afternoon, members of the committee. I am Lois Berrigan. I am the settlement services coordinator for the Association for New Canadians.

The Association for New Canadians, or ANC, was established in 1979. The association is the only federally funded settlement service provider in Newfoundland and Labrador. The ANC also provides services to refugee claimants under a contract with the provincial government.

The association offers comprehensive settlement service programs, including RAP, ISAP, HOST, LINC, and an employment assistance program and career enhancement service. In total, there are approximately 30 to 35 people employed at the ANC.)

The association currently holds the presidency of the Atlantic Region Association of Immigrant Serving Agencies, which is known as ARAISA, an umbrella organization of settlement service providers in the Atlantic provinces.

The association also sits on the Coordinating Committee for Newcomer Integration, or CCNI, an organization that works cooperatively with the provincial and federal government departments that deal with newcomer issues in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The association works closely not only with government-assisted refugees, but also with people who are sponsored by joint assistance, and our social worker deals extensively with the process of family reunification, among her other duties.

The work of the ANC includes programs that help our clients learn about the community and help them build social networks. The women's group, the men's group, and many youth activities provide opportunities for all our clients.

Some of the youth activities include a homework club, summer camp, teen dances, and the youth volunteer corps; and our social worker facilitates therapeutic groups in cooperation with professionals in St. John's.

I have ten years experience in the settlement field, and as I've mentioned, I am the settlement services coordinator for the association. During that time, I'd say I've worked with probably a thousand clients on a day-to-day basis, everything from their arrival to their settlement to their integration into Canadian society. I'll start at the beginning of the settlement process.

There are serious gaps in information being given to newcomers in the overseas orientations. Clients do not seem to be aware of the geographical expanse of the country. For example, some think a bus ride from St. John's to Vancouver takes about two hours. The clients we have been working with do not have a lot of information about St. John's itself, nor do they have realistic expectations about the level of assistance they will receive once they get to Canada.

Our settlement agency also needs to have more accurate information about clients before they arrive. If we have an accurate understanding of their linguistic abilities or special needs, for instance, we would be better able to serve these newcomers upon their arrival in the province.

Last night is a good example. We had a family arriving from Sudan. The plane obviously got turned back from St. John's airport. They went back to Halifax, and then back to Toronto. I didn't know if they could speak English at all. At 11:30 last night, I and the manager of CIC here were on the phone trying to locate them to see if they were okay for the night. That wouldn't have been a problem if I had realized they could speak a little bit of English. Little things like that help a lot.

The association recommends that the government give some thought to overseas visa officers having the opportunity to visit settlement agencies across the country in order to understand the nature of various destinations. If these visits could occur with some regularity, then officers would be more aware of the changing conditions and understand service changes that occur over time.

We would also recommend that people from settlement agencies visit or be seconded to overseas posts in order to better understand circumstances and procedures from that perspective.

Secondly, the resettlement assistance program, or RAP, should have more flexibility. An area of concern for the association are the local rates of income support. These rates are not realistic, particularly given the fact that these newcomers have no support network when they arrive, such as an extended family to lean on, unlike native Newfoundlanders, who can always draw on family or friends in times of hardship.

The association recommends a review of rates of income support. For a family of six or more, on $433 for rent, it is almost impossible to find an apartment or a house big enough to accommodate them.

The third point I would like to address is employment. Programs specifically aimed at employment are key to the whole settlement process. More money to extend language instruction for newcomers to Canada, or funds provided by Human Resources Development Canada, would recognize the importance of language training for the workplace and for professionals, and would make a meaningful difference.

Employment needs to be a part of the equation for effective integration. I personally have an appreciation of what it means to be without a job. I worked in a fishery, but because of the cod moratorium here, I had to retrain and go to find work in another area of life in 1992. I understand it's hard to be without work, and you can't settle until you actually think there's another job in the offing.

The association recommends that a labour market language training program be reintroduced.

My final point concerns the settlement allocation model. The model needs to be more flexible. A key feature should be the recognition of the necessity of having a minimum threshold in the number of government-assisted refugees needed to be able to maintain a cost-effective settlement service position. The association recommends that the threshold not drop below the present 155 government-assisted refugees. With the current settlement service infrastructure in place, a realistic number needed to maintain the current services is actually between 200 and 250 GARs destined for Newfoundland.

The settlement allocation model should also recognize that, on the whole, a greater effort is required to meet resettlement and integration targets. A two-year access to settlement service is more realistic, as opposed to the current one-year period.

Client groups who access our services vary from year to year, and one size does not fit all. There needs to be a recognition that clients come from a variety of countries of origin, and consequently require an extended service time to adequately meet their individual needs.

In conclusion, our agency is successful in serving the newcomers we receive. Although some people have left the province, many still want to come home, like true Newfoundlanders.

It's important to understand that any investment made in the resettlement integration process is an investment for the future. Figures released yesterday show that in a very short time immigrants will be filling a vital role in the job market and in the economy of the future. The association firmly believes that immigrants make a valuable contribution to the province and to the country. More and early investment in new Canadians will work to everyone's advantage...like the old Newfoundland saying, “Penny-wise and pound foolish”.

Finally, if you have the time—and if you are not snowed in—I'd like to invite you to the association, for a tour of the facilities and to meet some staff and clients. If you don't have time now, we'd love to be able to see you any time you are back in Newfoundland.

We'd also like to be able to submit a more detailed brief in writing, if this is possible.

Thank you.

· (1350)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Thank you very much, Ms. Berrigan.

I noticed in your brief that you mentioned it would be helpful if overseas officers could come and see what you deal with and what you do, and that you have the ability to make officer exchanges with them. For this committee too, this on-site business can be very helpful. So thank you for your invitation. We'll talk to our logistics man, to see whether this might be possible.

Let's move to Ms. Quaicoe, who will be presenting on behalf of the Multicultural Women's Organization of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Ms. Quaicoe.

Ms. Lloydetta Quaicoe (President, Multicultural Women's Organization of Newfoundland and Labrador): Good afternoon, and thank you for the opportunity to be able to present this brief.

The Multicultural Women's Organization is a voluntary, not-for-profit organization founded in 1982. It is governed by an elected volunteer board and has representation on the National Organization of Immigrant and Visible Minority Women of Canada.

I'll just name two of our objectives: to identify and develop strategies to meet the cultural, social, economic, and educational needs of women and their families from various cultures, and to promote changes where necessary to enhance the quality of life for immigrant, refugee, ethnic, and visible minority women and their families.

This brief and the recommendations that follow are presented taking into consideration the demographic composition of Newfoundland and Labrador. Three factors about the demography of the province are relevant to understanding the importance of Citizenship and Immigration Canada and, by extension, the settlement and integration of new immigrants and refugees into Canadian society. One is population decline and secondary out-migration. Newfoundland and Labrador has one of the highest rates of out-migration in the country, and statistics show a decline in the birth rate. Therefore, the issues of immigration and successful integration are crucial for the future economic growth of the province. Recently the province has experienced secondary out-migration of immigrants who had chosen to make this province their home but had to leave for the bigger cities. This is a phenomenon that needs further consideration.

The second factor is regionalization of immigration. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, the Honourable Denis Coderre, has proposed the regionalization of immigration through various initiatives, including the provincial nominee program, to increase the number of immigrants to smaller provinces. The total number of immigrants for 2003 could reach 300,000. If this province is to increase and retain its immigrant population, Citizenship and Immigration Canada will have to consider the broader implications of this reality in view of the fact that there's only one government-recognized settlement agency operating in the province.

The third factor is lack of large ethnocultural communities. Recent Statistics Canada results demonstrate that ethnic and visible minorities make up a small percentage of the total population of the province. As a result, there are no large, established, financially viable ethnocultural community groups to provide the necessary supports and resources that many immigrants and refugees need to resettle and integrate successfully into this province. Many immigrants and refugees have come without adequate finances and lack extended family support to assist in the process of integrating into a new culture.

Although government-sponsored refugees are not refugees in Canada, the pre-immigration experiences of such families differ from those of voluntary immigrants. Consequently, while all newcomers have the same basic needs, former refugee families have needs that are unique to their population. Furthermore, there are many immigrants in the province who do not fall under the category of those receiving services from the settlement agency.

In view of the above, we present the following factors that have an impact on the successful settlement and integration of immigrant and refugee families. First is settlement of children and adult family members. We have heard a lot about attracting immigrants to smaller and less-populated provinces, but we've yet to hear about supports and services for their children. Those children are an integral part of the family unit. When immigrant families arrive in this province, the school-age children are sent to school, and the school's policy is to place children in their age-appropriate grade.

In the past a majority of immigrants were professionals who had come to work in hospitals or universities. Their children were educated and well-adjusted. However, the demographic profile of immigrant children has changed, as more and more come with families that have been ravaged by war. Many of these children have missed years of formal schooling or have been in institutions where the level of schooling is below Canadian standards. Schools face many challenges associated with appropriate assessment, class placement, and evaluation of these children, as well as addressing their social and emotional needs.

While it is expedient to have school children placed in their age-appropriate grade, many of these children do not have the appropriate academic support and learning resources required for them to achieve. A study conducted in Newfoundland on the psychosocial needs of new immigrant and refugee school children demonstrated that the itinerant model of English as a second language, ESL, does not meet the language, academic, and social needs of immigrant and refugee students, most of whom have literacy and numeracy gaps.

In the junior high schools, students get one or two hours of ESL instruction a week. Do these youth have enough language skills to socialize with their peers?

· (1355)

Think of a 15-year-old, who has missed three years of schooling because of war-related circumstances, placed in grade seven and functioning at a grade three or grade four level. How about a 13-year-old who has never been to school and comes from a country that's linguistically, socially, and demographically different from Canada? These children and teenagers are not only trying to learn a language; they're trying to survive in a foreign culture. They're vulnerable to ridicule and low self-esteem if they perceive themselves to be stupid and maladjusted. In addition, most of their parents are learning English and do not have the expertise or adequate knowledge of the school system to assist them with their school work.

We would like to ask this committee, whose responsibility are these children? CIC might say education is a provincial responsibility, and the schools might say immigration is a federal responsibility. These children, to use a common Newfoundland idiom, are “caught between a rock and a hard place”. It's only a matter of time before they're squeezed right out of school.

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development defines at-risk youth as those “failing in school and unsuccessful in making the transition to work and adult life”, and who are as a result “unlikely to be able to make a full contribution to act in society.”

We strongly believe CIC has a moral responsibility to these children before it's too late. It is ironic when you consider that the very reason their parents came to Canada was to provide them with a good education and a better future. Conversely, the reason families with children are brought in by the Canadian government is so that Canada can benefit economically and socially, because these children will have the opportunity for a good education that will reinforce their chances for employment and make them contributing members of Canadian society.

Turning to ESL services for adults, language and cultural barriers hinder the successful integration of immigrants into Canadian society. Without adequate English-language skills—and I'm thinking mainly of those in anglophone provinces—many immigrants and refugees are socially isolated and cannot participate fully in civil society.

The language instruction for newcomers to Canada, or LINC, “provides basic training to adult immigrants in one of Canada's official languages”. This is from the CIC website, 2002. Up to three years are allowed to complete the training in accordance with the Canadian language benchmarks. This program is great for ESL learners whose first language is not English or who do not have any prior exposure to the English language.

The LINC program in St. John's is offered from 9 a.m. to 2:15 p.m. While it is important for parents to be home by the time their children return from school, why could these children not have an after-school program, which would help them speed up their process of learning and integrating, while these parents increased their learning hours and potential? Immigrants and refugees are accustomed to working long hours. If these parents were attending a college or university, they would have longer hours of instruction. We feel that when you add up the number of days schools are closed because of holidays, snowstorm days, and days when adult students stay home because they or their children are ill, the time left for language learning is minimal. These adult learners, like their children, need an accelerated language program to prepare them for the workforce.

Immigrants who are older than the high school age and who have significant gaps in their schooling need literacy programs, as well as the LINC program. They are at risk because there is no place for them in the high schools, yet they cannot find employment. It is easy for them to fall between the cracks if they are not steered into a literacy program that best meets their needs. They have skills and experiences that can be effectively used in the community.

A concern about housing for immigrants and refugee families is put forward by our organization on the premise that settlement is more than getting a house and the money to buy a bus pass. The fact is there's a 2% vacancy rate for housing in St. John's. Add this to the fact that some immigrants and government-assisted refugees are on a fixed monthly income, I think we just heard, of $433 a month. In addition to the cost of resettling in a new country in the middle of a Newfoundland winter, these families have to repay thousands of dollars spent on their airfare.

Concerning ESL services for schools, the housing situation is such that families who previously lived in a zone for the multicultural school, with a full-time ESL teacher, have to move to other locations where the neighbourhood schools do not provide ESL services—or if they do, it is the itinerant model. This model provides ESL instruction two or three hours a week. We consider this insufficient time for students with low literacy skills, who are not only illiterate in their first language but are functioning below their age- and grade-appropriate level. This drip-feed method of learning a second language is definitely not effective.

Concerning transportation, if these parents choose to keep their children in the school with a full-time ESL teacher, they have to provide their own transportation. On their meagre income and with so many expenses, these parents cannot afford a vehicle.

¸ (1400)

It is the school district's policy to provide transportation only if the student residing in the area is zoned for that school. Parents whose children require ESL services have to provide transportation for their children to go to the school that offers ESL services. Parents find themselves faced with the choice of having to put their six- or seven-year-olds on the metro bus for a 45-minute bus ride to school, or sending them to a school without the necessary ESL services. We believe that immigrant parents shouldn't have to make those choices in a country that promotes literacy and values education.

On social and emotional stability, refugee children have had to move and change residence almost all their lives. Some of them were born in refugee camps and have lived in two or three countries, not including their birth countries, prior to arriving in Canada.

These children settle down in a particular neighbourhood and school. They make friends, and the teachers begin to understand them and how best to help them learn. This becomes a stable environment for them, when suddenly they have to move and start all over again in another new school that is foreign to them and where they are the only ones from their cultural, ethnic, or linguistic backgrounds.

One mother who didn't speak English or French and was not literate in her own language had to move with a new baby to an area without a supermarket, laundry facilities, and transportation to a school with ESL services for her school-age children.

By relocating these families all over the city these children are missing out on the multicultural environment in the school, which has taken years to build and maintain. The small percentage of ethnic minorities in the province means that a child could be the only one from their ethnic or linguistic background in the school.

The benefits of being in a multicultural school include but are not limited to the possibility that someone else will speak their language to help them understand their schoolwork or interpret for the teachers; social supports that will reinforce the preservation of their heritage languages; administration and staff who are culturally sensitive; an ESL teacher on site to facilitate collaboration with classroom teachers; an ESL classroom where these children feel they belong; and an environment that values cultural and ethnic diversity.

On social economic status, low income and poverty force new immigrants and refugee families to take housing in undesirable neighbourhoods because that is what they can afford. Unfortunately, new immigrant children and teenagers are exposed to neighbourhoods that are not conducive to their successful integration into society. These children are vulnerable and fall prey to antisocial activities.

Next is unwanted social isolation. Being in a country where immigrants are unfamiliar with the language and culture adds to the stress of resettling and integrating into a new society. The difficulties and inability to access information and appropriate services compound these problems.

New mothers without English language proficiency find it difficult communicating with their neighbours. These women spend an inordinate amount of time alone in small apartments, having come from tropical countries where they spend time outside all day. Of course you've seen in the last two days what it's like outside. You can't even use the sidewalks. Some of them have toddlers as well whom they have to care for without extended family support. In addition to that, some of these women have been victims of war and violent conflicts.

In October 2002, immigration ministers discussed the important role immigration can play in building an innovative and sustainable economy. They agreed to work toward removing the barriers that immigrants face in integrating into the labour market. They also noted the need to work with employers to maximize the skills and knowledge that immigrants can contribute to Canada's economy. This was in a press release in October 2002.

Unfortunately, many immigrants come and find themselves unemployed or under-employed. As a result, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is not getting the full benefit of the human resources available in its immigrant population in the province. Even those who have retrained in their areas of expertise or completed courses in jobs that are in demand in the province still have difficulty getting employment.

Many new immigrants lack knowledge of how the labour market and the employment system work. These immigrants do not have extended family members who can speak on their behalf and assist them in the process of gaining employment.

In most cultures it's not respectable to receive money without earning it. Consequently, many immigrants on social or income assistance find it difficult to accept the money if they're not working or performing some kind of service in return. This leads to frustration, particularly if they find themselves faithfully attending the LINC school without experiencing much progress.

Secondary migration is usually not an option for immigrants because of the fears associated with venturing out into the unknown a second time, but many have been forced to make that choice. Although many new immigrants have chosen to stay in the province, mainstream services are not often culturally sensitive to nor aware of their needs. Few new immigrants participate in active citizenship and civil society.

¸ (1405)

Regarding systemic barriers to obtaining employment, many new immigrants and refugees find themselves unemployed or underemployed. Although there's a need for skilled and experienced workers, the credentials and post-secondary qualifications of many newcomers are not recognized, even for those coming from Commonwealth countries. In addition, systemic racism and discrimination in the labour market results in frustration for those who want to stay and work in the province and contribute to the economy.

Currently, foreign graduate students in Canada have a maximum of 90 days after graduation to find a job in their field of education in order to qualify for a one-year work permit. The 90-day window for job searching is extremely tight, moreso if they're living in Newfoundland, which has a limited job potential. The length of the work permit is too short to be an incentive for these students to stay and work in the province.

Finally, the lack of communication with consulate offices makes it difficult for eligible applicants for permanent residency. Previously, a 1-800 number was available to talk to someone about an applicant's file; however, this telephone service has been withdrawn. There should be an effective way applicants can be informed about what is happening to their application process and the status of their files. The time and cost involved could be reduced if a more effective system were put in place.

I'll just briefly give one or two recommendations.

In view of the issues presented above, we recommend that Citizenship and Immigration Canada collaborate with the Department of Education to provide literacy, as well as more effective ESL services and programs to immigrant children and youth; and that it create awareness among employers and the business community, informing them of the educational background, skills, knowledge base, and experience available in unemployed new Canadians, immigrants, and refugees.

Employing a trained person from another country without compromising Canadian standards would provide a global perspective and enrich the workplace environment.

We encourage independent research to examine the existing supports and services for newcomer families. Are they effective? Are they meeting the various needs of a culturally diverse population? What are the measurable results? Is there any systemic discrimination?

Ensure the delivery of settlement services is culturally competent and validates immigrant cultures, and that programs and services meet the needs of the whole family.

Thank you.

¸ (1410)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Well, I think you get an “A” for fast reading.

Ms. Lloydetta Quaicoe: I was trying to get a lot in.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Thank you, Ms. Quaicoe, for a particularly excellent brief, another one of the many we've heard. I know we'll hear more today. You really covered well a topic that's dear to my heart, and that is services to children. They are the leaders of the future, and they are, as you so well pointed out, falling through the cracks of our system in many cases. So thank you for that.

We'll move now to Newfoundland and Labrador Health in Pluralistic Societies, a presentation by Ms. Sen.

Ms. Purnima Sen (President, Newfoundland & Labrador Health in Pluralistic Societies): Thank you.

I'm going to refer to our organization briefly as NL-HIPS. That's easier.

Many of the articles I'm going to present overlap with Lloydetta's presentation. She did mostly the socio-cultural issues, and my topic is the socio-cultural issues affecting the health of immigrants and refugees.

First, here's a little bit about our organization. Our organization is a provincial non-profit volunteer organization. Our goal is to contribute to the health and well-being of people of diverse origins living in the province of Newfoundland.

We believe culture has a profound influence in shaping the health beliefs and practices of any given people at any given period of time. Our name refers to pluralistic societies because we believe it is not only the different ethnic groups, but there are cultural differences even in the mainstream. There is a cultural difference between rural and urban areas. It is very famous here because you know you are either a townie or a bayman, and there are lots of differences. We wanted to bring in all those aspects, and the first nations groups.

We are affiliated with the Canadian Council on Multicultural Health and we work collaboratively with several other organizations: the Canadian Ethnocultural Council; the Multicultural Women's Organization, which Lloydetta represents; the Women's Health Network; the Seniors Bridging Cultures Club; and the Seniors Resource Centre.

Lloydetta has covered the demography of the province, but I'll just mention a few points. The 2001 census said the total population in Newfoundland was a little over 508,000. Out of that, only 3,850 are from visible minority populations. I think this constitutes about one point something percent.

I'm focusing on visible minority groups. I'll talk about the reason later on. It's interesting to know that these 3,850 people came from 29 different countries. That's quite a wide range. And if we say 29 different countries, that means they speak 29-plus languages. Coming from India, I know there are so many different languages; we don't understand each other, though we are from East India. There are lots of language problems there.

Another thing Lloydetta mentioned about demographics was that a lot of young people are moving away. What is also interesting is that the people who still live here as immigrants, as their children have grown up they have gone out of the province. Some of the parents, after their retirement, are following their children to the mainland. So we are continuously losing people from here.

I think I mentioned about focusing on the visible minority group of refugees and immigrants, and we are not including the first nations as a group either. The visible minority groups are comparatively or relatively newcomers in Canada. Their culture is very different.

In earlier years, especially after the Second World War, a lot of refugees came from European descendants, but these people are coming mostly from Asia, Latin America, and Africa, and their culture is quite different. It's difficult for Canadian society, as well as for the immigrants and refugees, to adapt to something new. It's a challenge both ways.

¸ (1415)

Also, I think another thing we should remember is that there is a difference between immigrants and refugees. Immigrants came largely out of choice. They had time to plan, time to think it through, whereas refugees came from a completely different background. Many of them have been victims of torture or violence, and they have seen death. That is a completely different group. They did not have any time to plan, really.

When refugees come from this background, one of the problems they face is distrust. It's very difficult for them to trust others because of their experience. In this brief, while we have been focusing on the socio-cultural issues as they affect health, some of the other issues will be attached here as pointed out by the CIC.

Now on to socio-cultural issues. That's what I dealt with in more detail. It's very interesting. I was reading the document After the Door has been Opened by Morton Beiser that came out in 1988. It's very interesting to see that the problems that committee identified in 1988 are still there. Of the recommendations the committee gave, actually most of them are not complete. It brings forward a question: we have had so many task forces, so many royal commissions, and have spent so many tax dollars--what has happened to all these recommendations? Are they just sitting gathering dust, or what?

Morton Beiser's committee identified four areas of problems faced by refugees and immigrants: negative public attitudes; separation from family and community; language barriers; and lack of suitable employment.

Dealing with the language barriers first--because I think everybody knows that's a big barrier--for most of these people coming from Africa, Latin America, or Asia, English or French would be quite different. Even then they do try to learn, but the years of programs they have had--I think both Lois and Lloydetta mentioned.... We need to do something about it. We need to evaluate why, if it is effective, how it is effective; if not, why not?

Several studies in the literature reviewed mentioned the language barrier. The employment issue is itself a big one. Lloydetta has covered it, as has Lois. One of the problems for employment is the lack of skill in language and the non-recognition of foreign credentials and experience. Those are the two major barriers they face.

This one thing is very important. People who do not get employment, who do not have a job even though they are very qualified, can really have their self-esteem affected. If one devalues oneself, it can have a horrible effect on mental health.

Recently on the CBC news they were talking about one fellow who was an accountant in Pakistan. He has migrated to Canada but he is driving a taxi. He is working 12 hours a day and he doesn't get time to get the Canadian qualifications. He has absolutely no time.

There's another fellow who came from England who is of Indian origin. He was an accountant. He is working as a janitor. We're losing all the valuable expertise.

Some other studies mention that people with menial jobs, like domestic workers, sometimes don't even get time for medical help. They just can't get any time off.

¸ (1420)

I think Lloydetta and Lois also mentioned housing and transportation. In St. John's and in other cities there are a lot of problems. The Canadian Council on Refugees has discussed homelessness and housing problems. Here we don't have homelessness, but often we have overcrowded basement apartments. I know one family who came from Bosnia with six children and who live in a three-bedroom apartment, which is pretty crowded.

With our long winters, to be cooped up in an apartment can be traumatic and can have very destructive effects. It often leads to violence, because of the overcrowded conditions. The children, the adults, the youth, and everybody together don't have cars. Public transportation is expensive and inadequate, at least here in St. John's, because there is not bus service everywhere.

Social isolation is now the issue. Language barriers, unused and underused education and talents, systemic discrimination, low wages, and lack of transport facilities contribute to social isolation. Women tend to experience this more acutely than others. The Women's Health Network in Newfoundland carried out a project in 2002. They had a focus group of immigrant women, who verified the same things reported in the literature.

The other things that happen with immigrants and refugees deal with role conflict, gender, and age. Role conflict arises because of a role reversal or change of roles. In Canada in the 1970s, I remember when the typical male role was reversed. We had a lot of male fishermen suffering from depression; they were confused. All of a sudden they're in a different culture and find their role is changing.

In many cultures, women are supposed to behave according to certain norms, and if they don't do this, there are problems. Teenagers are also supposed to behave. Teenagers, in particular, face a real problem in this situation; they are caught between peer and parental pressure. One area is the dating problem. If they don't have a date, their peers will taunt them that there's something wrong with them. And if they do find dates, then their parents will not like or accept this. It is like the problems at a dance, where some of the refugees are teenagers and face various problems of acceptance or in enjoying the dance.

These are probably the areas.... Seniors are more isolated in their advanced age. I know many seniors who came with their adult children. When the first came, they were perhaps in their late fifties, and were useful and needed. They took care of housework and cared for the babies, but as they grew old and their children grew up they were now advanced in age and felt unneeded, as if life was futile to them. In the meantime, for so many years they had lost the opportunity of going out and being exposed to society at large.

Now the last one in this category is changes in immigration and citizenship policies. I found it very difficult to accept the new changes listed under Bill C-18, particularly clauses 16 to 18, 21, and 23 to 27. These are anxiety-provoking. If I am a citizen and my citizenship can be revoked because of some intelligence report, and I have no recollection, I really have no way of knowing what it is. I can be booted out from the country. This can be anxiety-provoking.

So much is happening. I think it is public knowledge that racial profiling is going on. If the target is the Muslim population, particularly of Middle Eastern origin.... And many of them have come from a war zone. They thought they had come to a safe haven, and again, like all of us, they have to start the whole thing again. So this can cause a lot of anxiety.

¸ (1425)

All of the socio-cultural factors mentioned do affect health, particularly mental health. In the medical sciences, I think Kirmayer's study in 1996 showed that utilization of medical services by immigrants and refugees is more or less comparable to mainstream society's; I think 78% used medical services compared to 76% of mainstream society in Canada. But the mental-health-related problems, or other stress-related problems, are much greater among this population. All the factors I mentioned—no jobs, or undervalued or underpaid jobs, isolation, discrimination, lack of language—produce a lot of stress, and the ultimate effect can be pretty bad.

Ultimately, all of these problems are costing the health care system more, though we are doing some patchwork and we are spending some money. It is costing the justice system more, because many of the youth are involved in criminal activities and are breaking the law, or abuse substances. So society is ultimately spending many more tax dollars. So this is one thing we need to consider.

My conclusion and recommendations are that refugees and immigrants are particularly vulnerable to mental health problems, resulting from the various socio-cultural stresses. Refugees are more vulnerable because of the traumatic experience they bring with them.

Budget cuts over a decade and the recent attempt to hastily change the policies of immigration and citizenship have deterred progress, which can deteriorate further.

The recommendations from our group are the following:

One, a concerted effort should be made to improve the language skills of this group, and current ESL programs should be evaluated for their effectiveness.

Two, effective policies should be adapted by all stakeholders to evaluate and accredit foreign qualifications and experience to help this group obtain suitable jobs. This can can be mutually beneficial, as this group can can provide valuable services for underserviced areas.

Three, all health, education, social services professionals, and law enforcement officers, along with their professional associations, should be trained in cultural sensitivity.

Four, a group of cultural interpreters should be trained and employed with remuneration to help refugees and immigrants access appropriate and available services. We say that our services are accessible to all, but this is not true in reality.

Five, appropriate translated materials and counselling should be made available to the refugees and immigrants about the systems in Canada, and, where possible, they should be educated and informed prior to their arrival on this soil.

Six, policies should be developed at the federal and provincial levels for settlement in other regions and provinces where no current agreeement exists.

Thank you.

¸ (1430)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Thank you, Ms. Sen. This was excellent information for the committee to consider.

We'll need to move quickly to Ms. Jeffrey, who has information for us on settlement programs and on the provincial nominee program. So we'll hear that now.

Ms. Donna Jeffrey (Refugee Immigrants Advisory Council): I didn't put forth any information on the Refugee Immigrants Advisory Council. Just to let you know, we've been in existence since 1991 as a completely volunteer organization. Only occasionally do we have a person who is paid.

We originally started out with refugee claimants and assisting them. Just to note the history a bit, my husband and I had actually just been in Bulgaria. I had a tendency to be very friendly with my Newfoundland book and say “This is where we're from, and maybe you'd like to go there.” Within four weeks after coming back.... In the end, 2,500 Bulgarians arrived. So they were a little concerned when we went off to China.

Most of my work is with refugee claimants, but not just refugee claimants--with the immigrant population. It is to try to get them integrated into the community—part of the community, not isolated as the newcomers are. That is the thing we work at a lot.

I'm also a sponsorship holder and act in that capacity for the Atlantic provinces for my denomination. So I come at it from a different avenue.

I mention at the first of my brief—and I will speak to some of these things rather than just read it completely. It is unfortunate; I know I was informed, but it was a short time for me to get things together and write a brief on the things I am concerned about. I will come at it the same way Lois did, with pre-arrival counselling.

I mention that from questioning a number of the refugees it appears most are not given pre-arrival counselling. This is the case whether they be English-speaking, and therefore language is not a problem, or not. I know in the past—and I'm looking back, I know—in some countries we were aware that some visa officers were able to give very good help. That was only at certain posts. However, it does not appear to be done now. There is cost-cutting at that end. There are too few visa officers overseas. There's no question about it, cutting at that end can and usually does end up costing at this end. It's sort of a case of pay now or pay more later.

With few visa officers abroad, in sponsorship our people are taking up to two years—and remember, we are often paying for the families—to actually get here. In that time you can lose the people. Their situation is such when they come, if they've been in a refugee camp, that you're starting at the bottom trying to build up.

I mention then, again as a sponsorship agreement holder, receiving these cards. I received 700 of them. I really wasn't sure what I was supposed to do with them, because as I point out, where my refugees are they do not have computers so that they can do “www” and get into the computer, and also, often they are not English-speaking. So I really wasn't sure, when they said “Here are 700 cards for your clients” and I was wearing my hat as a sponsorship agreement holder. I think it's a great thing, but maybe this wasn't the place where they could be used. I can see them being used here—once they get here—but it isn't for that, because it says “going to Canada.”

¸ (1435)

I'll point out I actually was a welcome wagon lady in St. John's, when I first arrived here. I became a welcome wagon lady right away. I find sometimes the orientation services are not there to facilitate successful socialization into the community. This is my big goal, to get them into the community as quickly as you can--realizing you can only do so much with so much time.

But often the settlement agency lacks the essential information they need on the refugee's language, culture, religion, personal and family circumstances, the current critical social and political climate, and environmental factors in their country of origin. This can be destructive rather than helpful, and it's very costly to the individual, the volunteer community, CIC, and Canada. If people are inappropriately placed, be it their housing, whatever, it's detrimental, and it's all because of a simple thing like not knowing the language is English, and there's no need of...you know, get on with their lives.

I'd also point out...I believe it's been six years, and possibly you were aware of the cultural profiles. Now, when I put in an order and request that they put out a cultural profile on Sierra Leone and Liberia, which are two English-speaking countries--and therefore more important, because since they're in the African continent, the presumption is that maybe they wouldn't be--it would help if they continued to print them.

I believe the CIC does pay for it, and to me this is money well spent. These are fantastic cultural profiles on the countries, and really, they're required reading if you're going to be settling people, be it from the Sudan, Rwanda, Somalia. Most countries, except for two...I asked them if they could please do a cultural profile, for the good of everyone, so we are aware of the background of the people who come into our country. Sorry, they said, CIC has stopped the funding.

So where do we now obtain that information? I realize that on the Internet, sometimes you can. But it's not like having.... And I find in going to speak in schools, the teachers absolutely love that, particularly if they know people from Sudan are here, because by reading it, you get an idea of their background, their culture, and the mistakes you can make.

Now, way back, we had many mistakes made in the hospital setting, where you wouldn't have known that there's one hand you shouldn't use to feed the person with. We almost lost that lady, because she had to be hand-fed and they fed her with the wrong hand. They couldn't understand why she wouldn't take the food. Finally, they put her on intravenous, and eventually they found out.

I also have nurses training with me, and I make them read this as essential reading, because they are the nurses of the future who are going to be out in the hospitals dealing with a much more multicultural society than we used to have.

I'll mention too that mental health is often severely affected by the delivery to the communities, because of.... I just realized I didn't attach the letter; I didn't even bring it with me.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): You can send it and we will distribute it.

Ms. Donna Jeffrey: Health issues are intrinsic to many of the settlement problems, as mentioned in other sections of this paper.

On family reunification, if we can't get the family in one way we can often do it through family reunification through the sponsorship agreement. But it's an absolutely important part of settlement, and whether they are close family members--children, spouse, parents, brothers, or sisters--I find they do not settle if the family members have been left behind.

They are very grateful to be here, but they start to worry about their family members. Some, of course, are missing. The husband often comes later because he has been missing. Once they discover the husband has turned up in a refugee camp or they have found where he is, he should be fast-tracked, because his wife and children are trying to settle alone in a strange country. This is definitely detrimental to the wife, particularly if she knows he's been found. I guess that means having more visa officers overseas so these people can be fast-tracked, because coming here a year after finding them is just too long.

I mention the well-known reunification case that was heard nationally on the CBC. I won't go into the story, but he was found in England after he had addressed the House of Commons and the House of Lords on refugee issues. He was delayed in coming. It was most important that he get here. He had to leave his job, of course, where he was dealing with traumatized children who had been separated from their parents. But his case was held up in Mississauga--it wasn't Ottawa or the high commission in London. Everything was ready, and it was held up by the people who were going through the papers in Mississauga. The system went into failure mode. A good-news story was about to become a CBC bad-news story. In the end, a minister's permit was given.

On recognition of foreign experience and accreditation, I put obtaining a job and the recognition of foreign experience and accreditation on par with family reunification. We have seen medical doctors, school principals, teachers, special trauma counsellors, nurses, psychologists, and social workers unable to work at their professions when, in most cases, not only are their skills needed by this province, but they are urgently needed by their fellow refugees in this country. The cost of failing to facilitate the timely delivery of their experience and expertise is very high. Many want to volunteer their assistance.

When one of my sponsored medical doctors tried to get in, it took him six years in a province that needs doctors, and he's still at the low end. He was a specialist, and it was a mistake to be a specialist, I've discovered. He was also a PhD in gynecology and obstetrics. We tried to find jobs for him and other things to do, but the people here were embarrassed. I know in Toronto they've been pizza deliverers instead of baby deliverers all along--and taxi drivers. But here they were actually too embarrassed to hire him. He had to go on social assistance. Now, if you don't call that a waste of our social assistance money.... He is not the only one; that has happened again and again.

¸ (1440)

Also, it gives them that feeling of not being able to earn their own keep. It's very humiliating for some people to come here and go on social assistance.

No sensible alternatives have yet been developed by the rigid professional associations, unions, business associations, and government. We run the risk that outsiders could mistake our society's ineffective behaviour as prejudicial or racist.

We've been working at this with the Canadian Council of Refugees for a number of years, pleading and pleading over the loss of these valuable people to our society. The result, as I say, has been a very high price paid in the frustration of those who wish to demonstrate that they are responsible citizens and earn the respect of their new community, as well as the unnecessary high cost of the assistance program. The enormous lost opportunity, cost, and waste of human resource is appalling.

Concerning education, Lloydetta has already mentioned, but I will again just dwell on it a bit, that until now, in this province, we have had no special “welcome and assessment” classes, as there are in some other provinces. The consequences for the children are definitely detrimental.

The other thing is--and this may be an impossible thing, because I am pushing community integration above all, because I think when you get community integration you get your people to stay, and retention is always a problem in our province--originally, and now I'm talking 12 or 14 years ago, in Newfoundland and Labrador the teaching of ESL, now known as LINC, was done in a community college. The students now, of course, are in a separate area, removed from their broad-based community college when they were placed under the one government settlement agency, but therefore isolated. Having an ESL program or LINC program within the community college was definitely, by far, the best delivery model for this program.

The ESL students had exposure to other disciplines in the college we had here: art, photography, technical skills. There was everything there, and they could see it in the same building where they were. They would mix together, the Newfoundlanders with the newcomers. I talked to the former principal about how that had worked so beautifully, because through associating with the students from away they made new friends and learned about the other cultures.

But also, many of them transferred within the same building. Once they had their English, they saw hope: “Okay, I can do this. I can study this.” And I point out that many of the ESL students back then, including Canada's Postmaster General—he did come from that setting—went on to achieve great success in their careers. This was truly successful integration. It was of benefit to both immigrant and society. As you probably know, in many provinces they still do the ESL or LINC-type program within the community college. To me, this is the best practice.

I just want to pick up on one thing Purnima said about the difference in the culture. When the people we're sponsoring come to this society—and they come to a society where we have changed drastically.... From my time to raising my five children and my grandchildren, it's a whole different world. In my time, whether I was at university or not, and it didn't matter how many degrees I had, I would stay at home while my husband went to work and I raised the children.

¸ (1445)

Also, the husband was then considered—I know it's not politically correct to say these things—the head of the house. He was the disciplinarian. Now, when they come, our culture has completely changed. The father is suddenly treated to, “Who are you to discipline me or to say this?” It's the idea, which I find very disturbing, of the young person saying “If you do this, if you touch me...”. If you come from a country where spankings were administered on the bottom and they're absolutely taboo here, the child has been told you can phone that number. That has happened, and that to me is horrible for the family.

And I do believe you mentioned that in the cross-cultural, the mental health.... As a senior in society, this is my latest rampage. You have to think of these people.

The man is completely depressed, because if the women too think they can do this here, whereas in the society they came from they wouldn't do that, it destroys the fabric of the family. So I think this is something that has to be....

In the end, you see, we're all losers. In terms of any of these things we've mentioned this afternoon, our moitivation is the fact that we want it to work, we want people to be appraised and given their due of what they can contribute to us, because it is all what can they contribute to us. If you lose one, one is too many, as they say.

I have put my recommendations there at the bottom. I've missed some of them: facilitate the process for obtaining the required recognition of the credentials and relevant experience of foreign professionals; the welcome classes; appoint more overseas officers, etc.

¸ (1450)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Thank you very much, Ms. Jeffrey. I found your presentation particularly practical, and that's a good complement to other presentations we've heard, which were more on the philosophical level. The operational level is very important as well.

I should tell all of you as presenters, we did not receive parliamentary direction to travel as a committee until the House reconvened after the Christmas break, and that was at the end of January. So we too were scrambling to follow that directive and put this trip together through the able assistance of our clerk and our logistics person, John Bejermi, and we really appreciate everyone who was involved in helping to make this happen. And please know that if you feel that additional information would be particularly helpful to the committee you can still forward it and we will look at it very carefully.

I think today we've had so much to think about that we don't feel a lack of information, and I'd like now to give members of the committee a chance to interact with you on some of their questions and observations about the information you presented today.

Madame Dalphond-Guiral, if you would begin.

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval Centre, BQ): Thank you, Madam Chairman.

I want to thank all four of you for your presentations. They were very interesting. What is very useful for the committee is that you have been able to sum up your concerns into very specific recommendations. I would like to follow-up on some of them.

You probably agree all four on the comment of Lois when she said that newcomers, when they arrive here in Newfoundland, have really no idea of what to expect. You recommend that visa offices abroad who deal with applicants should be better informed. I think it is the least we should expect. These people should have the required knowledge to explain to applicants what to expect.

We went on a tour abroad last year and what we saw was amazing : hundreds of people lining up for a visa or to submit an application for landed status. The demand seems so enormous that one really wonders how we could deal with it unless we invest large amounts of money to hire people wanting to do this job.

This is my first visit to St. John's, Newfoundland. We almost did not make it last night, but we finally got here. I took a little walk this morning. I know where St. John's, Newfoudland, is but I was surprised by how colourful the houses are and I thought to myself that people must be repainting them every summer. But when you come here from Africa, from the other side of the world, I am sure you are so worried that you do not even notice.

Let me say quite frankly that one of the major concerns of the opposition is the realization that there is an enormous gap between political statements outlining broad objectives and reality. While our laws are not perfect, they still have a good side to them, including the fact that they set out broad objectives. But there is an enormous gap between the discourse and reality.

There have been increases in the immigration budget over the last few years, but the reasons were clear. For example, there has been a large influx of refugees from Kosovo. This is why there has been this spike in funding, because money was required to help them settle in Canada, but there has been no general increase although Canada is very lucky to have such a strong economy and available resources. But I also feel that as a government we do not really listen to people like you who deal with people in dire straits and who are vulnerable.

I also read a report in today's Globe and Mail that made reference to a recent study showing a large increase in the percentage of immigrants who are in very good jobs. This is the case for one group, those who are highly skilled. They succeed in finding really good employment or leadership positions. But it does not apply to everyone.

It is presently difficult for our immigrants to become self-sustaining. It is an issue and it is probably greater here in Newfoundland than in other regions of Canada, since your young people too want to go to Montreal, or Toronto or Vancouver. It will take a very strong will to overcome this problem.

¸ (1455)

But strong will is expressed through policies and this is where we come in. We need to convince the governments who make the decisions. Before the start of the meeting I talked about the fact that we constantly meet people and listen to their presentations. We already know and have a feel for a lot of things.

I for one support the concept put forward by one of you of going out and meeting with the providers, the stakeholders and clients. It is very enlightening. It is one thing to listen to someone talking about a situation and another to seeing it with one's own eyes.

We had the opportunity to experience this during our travel abroad. When we are in Canada, we usually hear from the leaders of organizations. That is fine, but it is useful to get another perspective. I have been sitting in the House of Commons for ten years and I do not remember going out as a committee to meet with stakeholders in the field, except when dealing with aboriginal issues where in some cases we went into the field. I think this is something we should do more often.

I do not really have any questions, these are merely general comments I wanted to make. I support most of your recommendations. I am sure the committee will make them his own and try to follow up on them. The forthcoming budget should give us a few indications. Political will manifests itself in the way you spend your money.

[English]

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Madame Dalphond-Guiral has raised a number of issues, and if any of the panel has some thoughts in response to the discussion that Madame initiated, perhaps this would be a time for you to give those interventions to the committee.

Ms. Sen.

¹ (1500)

Ms. Purnima Sen: The comment was made that we don't have job opportunities in this province, and that is true; it's why all the Newfoundlanders are going away. But in one area at least we can have more people employed here, and that is in the field of health.

Yesterday they were talking of how there are only six child psychiatrists in the province, three full-time, three part-time, and there is a waiting list of 200. Can you imagine 200 children waiting for psychiatric physicians?

There's one place where we have doctors. Donna mentioned a physician who has been sitting here for so many years, and she went back to get a physician here. So there are physicians, and I know personally some physicians who came and wanted to go for psychiatry but could not get anywhere. One I know took lab technician training and works as a lab technician somewhere else. That is a sad state of affairs.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Does anyone else have a thought?

Thank you, Madame Dalphond-Guiral.

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: It is obvious that recognition of credentials is a difficult issue throughout the country and that professional associations are throwing up a lot of resistance in this regard. I only need to look at what happened recently in Quebec with my friends from the College of Physicians and with specialists. Professionals do not always make service their priority. This is unfortunate.

This mind set might change if the public applies enough pressure. However, as long as professional associations will make their decisions with regard only to their own interests, nothing will change and people will waste their experience, their knowledge and skills. Furthermore, there is no doubt these people then destroy themselves as individuals.

[English]

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Ms. Jeffrey.

Ms. Donna Jeffrey: I was just thinking also, it's not just doctors; it's people who come who are the precise persons we need. They are the skilled trauma counsellors to deal with children. It can be social workers; it can be, well, no, you can't because....

What a waste of all that wisdom. They could work with the children who come from other countries who have been traumatized. I know in my hundreds and thousands of cases for the last 10 or 12 years with the sponsorship work, the cases where I get the letters, and I know how traumatized these children are. They have seen their parents killed, their mothers raped. That is obviously what they come from. I have that information, not that I've ever been to a refugee camp, but because of, over the years, ten years or more, reading letters from camps, I know what happens.

If you have someone here.... To me, it's just common sense. If you lose one, then the potential of that person is lost. So it is cost-effective to allow these people to get into their field and start to fast-track them if you must.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): It's not just that they have the requisite skills, but they also have cultural sensitivity. That should be helpful.

Ms. Donna Jeffrey: Yes, exactly.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): I'd like to give Mr. Pickard a chance to engage the panel with comments and questions.

Mr. Jerry Pickard (Chatham—Kent Essex, Lib.): Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

There are people coming to Canada, immigrants, refugees, who are going to do all right, going to do well just because they have something inside them, something that drives them. They have a way of achieving success under the most difficult circumstances. In many respects we could make their way easier, but they're not the ones you folks are concerned about. Your concern has been very clearly raised about those who are coming to Canada with expectations that will never, or possibly never, be achieved in their lifetime and possibly in future generations.

I believe that we have similar problems in some of our major cities: Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, or other areas. But they're not exacerbated as much as they are here in Newfoundland, or in Nova Scotia, as we heard in testimony in Halifax yesterday, or in rural Canada, and in most smaller communities without that social support network that is there to help.

I believe that in some of the presentations it was pointed out that we have very few social support networks in order to help new Canadians. They're really left in isolation, left without knowing what facilities and support mechanisms are there to help them, left without family members, not knowing where some of the family members are.

There are a whole set of expectations that are very difficult to deal with in a land where things are upside down and turned around from what they normally are used to. And how then do they survive, not just the children, but the adults, those who have very good skills coming into Canada but are unable to apply them?

I think what has come to my mind is that we're not doing the job we need to. But beyond that, the will of society in Canada may vary from area to area to area. We need to do a major job in changing the social view, the will of the society, the operations that go. It's not just money we're talking about here. We're talking about enough money to make life a survival base.

Beyond that, we're talking about support. We're talking about being able to use the skills and the training, and if the skills from training aren't there, we're talking about putting them there. We're talking about two hours of English second-language classes, ESL.

In my mind, it's absolutely impossible that if we don't have that network out there helping those young people integrate with other young people.... That's probably a much better way to learn the language than ESL classes.

There are barriers for them to get out in the community and work. And I believe what we need, and I read a couple of recommendations.... I look at it, and it says we have to examine our ESL classes. You said very clearly they're not working. Let's make sure, if we're going to provide English as a second-language class to new Canadians, that we do it on the strength of making it long enough, supportive, and well developed, and do the work that's needed on the ground, not examine it.

We've examined it, and you've come up with a very clear conclusion: it doesn't work; there are not enough resources there to make it work properly. At least that's what I've heard. Maybe I need a little clarification on that from you, but that was clear in my mind.

¹ (1505)

Having group interpreters to tell people what services there were in the area was another recommendation. It seemed fairly consistent.

To me, in areas like St. John's, Newfoundland, I would suggest that we should have community councils, councils of all of your organizations that can sit down and draw together clear, concise booklets that would give them direction in the languages of all of the immigrants you're going to deal with. And if they can't read it, have somebody in the community who can translate that for them and who can put them in place. We need an army of people there who are able to provide that service.

A couple of organizations have said that in their organization they don't get paid support people. Well, if the social will is there, we can look at the board of education, we can look at the provincial government, we can look at the federal government, we can look at the Department of Human Resources Development, we can look at ACOA programs. There have to be programs there that can support these ventures. And it's not just a few dollars into the settlement programs that's going to work in the end. A whole lot of different aspects have to be dealt with.

We talked about professional organizations. We do not open our professional organizations to the appropriate opportunity for new Canadians. That's obvious, because in many cases there are provincial professional bodies that scrutinize who can and who cannot practise. And we're not just talking about professionals, by the way. You know as well as I that we're talking about skilled trades, we're talking about every type of organization. We're talking about job availability, and oftentimes there's a reluctance to be more inclusive and more accepting. Yet we know that here in this province as well as in all areas across Canada in the next ten years we're going to be short tens of thousands of mechanics, tens of thousands of those in the skilled trades areas--nurses and doctors in the health care areas, all the professional areas. We need to foster opportunities for them.

When I look at it I have to really marvel at the fact that you folks work so hard and you put your heart into trying to make a difference. But it must be as frustrating to you as it is to the new immigrants, because you don't seem to be making that headway that needs to be made in a society that's certainly going to need that support in the future.

I think this committee can bring a very strong message back to the department, but I don't believe in any respect that it's one aspect of the society. Government legislation is not going to resolve what you're telling us and what needs to happen. There has to be a whole change of social viewpoint to be supportive in fostering immigration in this country, because it is a valuable asset that we need.

When I arrived in Newfoundland last night and turned on a television there was a very successful dentist who arrived in Canada 10 years ago and who employs 19 people. He was able to generate a fair income for his family and he had a good perspective in the community. This could be the case for hundreds of our communities that are short of dentists, doctors, the rest of the spectrum. I won't name lawyers; we have a lot of lawyers. I'm only kidding, because our chairperson's a lawyer.

¹ (1510)

I guess my question to you is how do you see your organizations and you working within the structure to make a difference?

You can make a report here. We can go back and push that back in a voice that says yes, we need to make sure there are extra support mechanisms in smaller provinces. We need to make sure that those targeted areas where all or 90% of our immigrants go have certain support bases that are not existent in St. John's, Newfoundland, that are not existent in rural Canada, that are not existent in Flin Flon, in western Canada. And we need to spend more time and effort to make sure that this distribution of proper, adequate service is there for people. But how can you, on the ground, direct that? Can you reach the boards of education and get more English-as-a-second-language classes? Can you get support from community professionals to hire immigrants or train them in certain ways? Do the building tradespeople in this community seek the support of immigrants to work in those areas? Are those things that can be done locally to move that issue forward?

¹ (1515)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Who wants to tackle that?

Ms. Purnima Sen: I'll try.

Thank you, Mr. Pickard. I think you have given some very good ideas.

As for me, yes, I think there are a lot of innovative ways we can do things and we don't need much money. My viewpoint perhaps is a little obsolete in today's society. I come from India and I'm quite prudent.

I find lots of things are very wasteful in society. The thing is that everybody wants everything new and everything has to be disposable, which to me is very wasteful, really.

A lot of these things can be done.

Now, I have a group of cultural interpreters to be trained and employed. The reason I say that is because the number of volunteers is gradually decreasing. In all provinces I think there's quite a drastic reduction in the number of volunteers. I think that is nation-wide. It's true.

The second thing is it is not just language interpreters, but also cultural interpreters who can help, particularly in the area of health and even in welfare. They can look for things that just questions and answers would not give. In the beginning, when we had all the recruiters, quite often the children were used as interpreters. How can a child ask the mother or the father when the question comes to “How is your sexual life?” No way.

So these are some of our problems. For others, we could use volunteers, we could use some other family members, but this is a very sensitive area where we really need.... And even if we have volunteers, I think volunteers also need to be trained. The reason I say that they should really organize them is because of a lack of volunteers. Because I'm struggling with my own other issues.

And the other thing I find, which also I'm amazed about, is that we are oriented to a lot of task forces, a lot of commissions, and nothing ever happens.

My question actually to Ms. Ablonczy is this. What is going to happen to all these rounds of conferences you are having? Is something going to happen to this?

Thank you.

Mr. Jerry Pickard: Maybe I could just say that's a very good question.

I've looked at some of the recommendations. Listen for just one second. If I were to pick this up, it says: “A concerted effort should be made to improve language skills for this group and current ESL programs should be evaluated for their effectiveness.” That's about as academic a statement as I've ever heard, and what sense is it going to make? Zero. People are going to say we know what they're doing.

That 's why I think you came with very moving testimony about somebody getting two hours ESL a week. That's not enough. That's not helping that person integrate and be part of the community. We don't need to evaluate two hours a week. We need to say “You're not doing the job”. At least, that's where I'm coming from.

I don't mean to be critical; don't get me wrong. I'm trying to be helpful. But if I look at the reports, there are six or seven pages about the misery and difficulties you're dealing with and a half page of very short academic statements that say “These are our recommendations”.

Your recommendation, in my view, should be 20 hours of ESL for every person who needs it, every week. Let's zero in on what's needed and say it the way it is.

I'm not critical, mind you. That's the way I see you should be going at it, straight on. Your expertise is very important to all of us.

¹ (1520)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Ms. Berrigan, just a quick response to that. I'd like to have a chance too.

Ms. Lois Berrigan: Yes.

May I make something clear here? The person who was receiving two hours per week of ESL language would be a youth, a child in school. The adults receive five and a half hours per day, five days a week, of ESL training--from 9 o'clock in the morning till 2:15 in the afternoon.

So adults are receiving it. The only time an adult is blocked from receiving ESL is if they have a small child, because unfortunately, our day care is not built to take care of children under the age of one. That is a problem we're trying to work out.

So the adults are receiving more than two hours. It's the children, the youth, who are probably receiving only two hours in the classroom setting within their own schools.

I just wanted to make sure you understood that.

Mr. Jerry Pickard: I can probably help you a little bit, too.

I spent 25 years in education. I taught special classes for 10 of those 25 years. I know the ESL programs very well. I know the children don't get enough coaching and support in the classrooms. They're integrated into regular classrooms and they need an awful lot more specialized service up front, which would save, as you said, dollars in the long run.

Those are areas I've devoted a fair amount of my lifetime to and understand. I also, with the board I worked with, had a lot of contact with the adult side of ESL, and I spent time going out and working with some of those adults in the ESL classes after I was a member of Parliament. So I have some background there, and I feel that we're not on the ground doing that.

I feel it's primarily because that whole social will isn't there. We do run into an obstacle. People will say immigrants take jobs away from our community. Somebody mentioned the bias and restriction. That is there in this society. We all know that.

We have to overcome that, and we have to point out the good facts. These folks can generate wealth in this country. These folks can fill gaps that we cannot fill ourselves. These folks are going to be necessary over the next ten years if Canada is going to proceed forward.

One person yesterday made the comment--and I thought it was very important--that those provinces that absorb immigrants are the ones that are showing more progress in job creation and job development over the others. So a key or a measure of how a province is doing often is how many immigrants they are absorbing.

I think that relationship would be a good sales point, for this province, in particular.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Thank you, Mr. Pickard.

I would just like to engage each of you briefly in the time we have left.

First of all, Ms. Berrigan, your Association for New Canadians you said is federally and provincially funded. What are the approximate percentages of funding from each of those?

Ms. Lois Berrigan: I'm not sure; I'm sorry. I know the provincial level funds our employment assistance program. The LINC school is totally federally funded, as far as I know. I'm sorry, that's not my area. I don't want to answer anything I don't know about.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): That's quite all right. We have heard that because federal funding has to be reapplied for every year, it's difficult to do long-term planning. Are you aware whether that's an issue for your organization?

Ms. Lois Berrigan: It is a fact that it is applied for each year. I'm not sure.... I'm sorry, I don't want to answer something I'm not quite sure of.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): That's all right. You might want to make a note, and your association may want to get back to us on that.

You mentioned in your brief that newcomers to Canada often do not have realistic expectations about what they can expect as far as settlement and support services are concerned. Can you give us some idea what the general expectations are?

Ms. Lois Berrigan: Some of the people who have come wanted their car. When I went to pick them up at the airport, they thought the van I had brought to the airport was theirs: “This is what the client has told me.” They were told they would have their own car: “Everybody in Canada has a car. Where's mine?”

¹ (1525)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Who tells them this?

Ms. Lois Berrigan: According to them, the people overseas—the visa officers. I can't say that the visa officers did; I can't say if it was the person next to them in the refugee camp, where sometimes stories filter back such as “Hey, everybody in Canada has their own car”. They just forget to say that we all have to buy them and that we have to pay on them for the rest of our lives, most likely. It's just unrealistic expectations. That's only one example, one of the most extreme.

They forget that they have to work towards their goal as well. They think we're going to help them—and not everybody is like this—that we're there to be their servants until.... You know: “I'm here now; get me a job.” Unfortunately, that's coming from the visa post overseas, not necessarily, as I said, from the visa officers. It could be from the person in the camp next to them, or from stories that filter back through the grapevine.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Or it may be from the immigration consultants who take money to help people get to Canada. Whoever tells them this, and however misconceived it is, I think we can realize it would be a tremendous letdown and disappointment and frustration to find out that these wonderful expectations in fact not only aren't met, but that the resources people are then permitted to live on are pretty substandard. I think your emphasis on better communication is very well taken, because having expectations that are dashed is, for all of us, a very difficult experience on top of all the other experiences.

Ms. Lois Berrigan: Also, sometimes you feel as if they use Newfoundland as a stepping stone to get into the rest of Canada. It's easier to say yes, I'll go to St. John's; then once I'm there I can go on to wherever—hence the two-hour bus drive to Vancouver. I had difficulty trying to convince a family that's it more than even a two-hour plane ride to go to Vancouver. They kept saying: “Well, my aunt lives in Vancouver. She said it's only two hours away.” I'm sure I spent a good hour trying to.... I had maps out, saying “You're here, and this is here. It's easier for you to go back that way.” But until they're actually here and realize this, it doesn't happen.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): On these rates of support, I honestly didn't know before this tour that the rates of support, especially for refugees, are so incredibly low. It's just unbelievable that someone could even be expected to survive on that. The consideration on the other side that I've heard raised is that if support levels are higher, it diminishes the incentive to get off the support and to work hard to establish yourself. In other words, it's as if adversity is a driver for success. I think there may be some merit in that. I just wonder what your response would be to that particular point of view on support levels.

Ms. Lois Berrigan: I really think the support levels are way too low. It's impossible to find a two-bedroom apartment in St. John's for $433, let alone a four-bedroom apartment. A couple gets $433 and so does a family of ten. There's no possible way they can justify that. I know it's reflected in the provincial government's rates.

If I were to make a recommendation I would say that if you have to leave it at the lower level, then if someone has a job don't start clawing back money. Leave more of an incentive to start work. Right now I think they're allowed to make up to $75 a month. That's not a whole lot of incentive to go to work.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): I see Ms. Jeffrey agreeing with you.

I also uncovered a study in Minnesota, I believe, where there was a pilot project permitting people on public assistance to keep some of their income if they worked. I'm just going to present that to the committee and review that. Others have suggested that, and it makes sense.

I have just one last question for you. All of you talked about employment being the key, and how difficult it is to have a social comfort level. Is there anything else that could be done in a province like Newfoundland and Labrador, where there really aren't strong ethnocultural communities, to make people feel welcome, feel good about being here, and feel accepted as part of the community? Are there any strategies that haven't been discussed? Others have brought forward ideas, but is there anything you'd like to put before us that hasn't already been brought forward?

¹ (1530)

Ms. Lois Berrigan: Other than jobs--no. We try to do our best introducing people to the different cultures and communities around. We try to educate the public around us on the people who are coming. We have speakers who go out to the schools to try to make the local people understand what these immigrants are coming from.

I'm used to hearing, “You're working with who? You're working with what? Aren't you helping them? They don't have jobs; we don't have jobs ourselves.” They don't realize the stories behind this. So it's our job to educate the people around us on what's happening. Then they become more open and welcoming to the various communities.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): I can see that would be important.

Have you tried an internship program or set up a job-shadowing program?

Ms. Lois Berrigan: I think a few years ago there was a job-shadowing program.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Ms. Quaicoe, you talked eloquently in your brief on the human cost of poorly delivered immigration support services and immigration programs in general.

You've probably all seen in today's Globe and Mail the study that's been done on the people deficit: the fact that our workforce is shrinking and 70% of new workers in Canada come from immigration. So the work you're doing is vitally important to all our communities across the country.

I raised this with Ms. Berrigan. I was struck by your information about the lack of ethnocultural community support and how to compensate for it. Is there anything you can think of that hasn't been mentioned that would help compensate for that lack of ethnocultural community support at the present time?

Ms. Lloydetta Quaicoe: Currently, as I mentioned, I'm the president of the Multicultural Women's Organization. What we have done is to try to involve many of the local Newfoundland and Labrador people as well as the ethnic groups. So instead of having smaller groups on their own, we sort of come together.

In the Multicultural Women's Organization we have 25 different countries or ethnic cultural groups represented, and we do activities within the community. For example, every March 29, in recognition of International Women's Day and the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, we set up an international food and craft sale. We bring in a lot of the local people and say this is us and this is part of our culture that we'd like to share with you. Through that, we hope to build relationships and try to have some kind of understanding and develop positive attitudes towards immigrants and refugees within their community.

I haven't really thought of any other ways we could do that, other than raising our profile within the community, making ourselves available. I think the local people have to see that some of us have wanted to make this our home and that we want to live with them in peace, and together we can work towards the common good, that we're not to be seen as “those immigrants” or find ourselves labelled or isolated. So it's anything that we feel we can do within our organization.

I'm also involved and serve on boards of various other organizations, because that's the goal as well. I volunteer in the schools or church organizations. I'm on the Refugee and Immigrant Advisory Council, and I'm on the NLHPS executive.

So it's happening. I know there are pockets of it, where local Newfoundlanders are very accepting of other cultures that are here and the fact that it's just a small group and we try to help each other.

That's why I get to respond to Mr. Pickard's mention of what we can actually do. It's because our numbers are small.

I find that when you have to ask for volunteer help within the ethnic community, it's pretty much the same people who have to do it, because the numbers are small. You can only give of your time so much; you can only give of your resources so much. That's why we sometimes feel that if we can get help, we can move some of the ideas and have a vision.

I go to the schools and walk those corridors and see children who've grown up in a country where they spoke Arabic all the time, and they're here for two years and they still have difficulties; they don't even have a friend, because you need the language to communicate. When you think of students in junior high, they're already going through so many changes in themselves as a person, and when you see them in the corridor with their head bowed and walking, and you know they're not making good grades at school, it really breaks your heart.

So because we don't have a large community pool to say, well, okay, we'll take so many people who speak Arabic to go into the schools to help them, at least translate for them, it makes it very difficult.

¹ (1535)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Well, I can sure see that, and a lot of the reading I've done says that when children--especially, as you mentioned, adolescents, who are already at a difficult time--meet with ridicule and rejection on a regular basis, that actually pushes them into the arms of gangs and anti-social activities, which can affect their ability to contribute to society for years to come, or perhaps close it off altogether.

Has there been any success with a buddy system, where you match an immigrant or newcomer kid to two or three Canadian kids to give them a little support group?

Ms. Lloydetta Quaicoe: Most of the schools have that system. It's not very structured as such, but if there is an ESL teacher within the school, that ESL teacher helps and will collaborate with the classroom teacher. But when it's the itinerant system, it's very difficult, because the ESL teacher is only there certain days of the week. Here, they go on a once every sixth day or seventh day cycle. So she's only there one day, and it's not usually the same day of the week.

Individual classroom teachers would then try to get one of the local children to sit with another child to help them along in class. But of course that means you have to have a class where you have a child who is willing to do that and whose work is at such a level that he or she can, because sometimes it is taking the child from his or her own work to help. Sometimes it's the feeling that, oh, we always have to help the immigrant children, and it becomes a social construct of what an immigrant child is, if they have language barriers or cultural barriers within the school.

They do have buddy readings in most of the schools, which means that the grade fives or sixes read with the kindergartens or grade ones, that type of a system. But the actual peer buddy system is something the individual schools or the individual classroom teachers will have to do; there's no structure throughout the school system.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): I have talked to people like all of you who work so hard on helping at the people level.

Ms. Sen, I just have one question for you. You had a very good presentation, and others have spoken to you at length. I've looked at your recommendations. You mentioned that new Canadians have some anxiety about the proposed new national identity card and about the new Citizenship Act. I wonder if you could tell the committee the nature of those concerns.

Ms. Purnima Sen: My main concern about what I've been reading and what I've been hearing in the news is that this is almost targeted to one group. I have a few friends here who have come from one of the Muslim countries, and they are very much disturbed with this. All these people I'm talking about are well accepted and well treated. But for somebody like the physician that Donna mentioned, who has been here for six years and is from a Middle East country, if he has to go again through all this turmoil, that may ruin him.

Those are some of the concerns. And I think some of the issues that have been raised are privacy concerns, that everybody will have all our data. Besides that, it's the issue that perhaps only one group will have to carry it, that it will be mandatory for them if we go for the identity card. For others, for a citizen, it will be okay not to carry it. But if racial profiling is being done, everybody knows who the target is, so whether they're citizens or not, they'll have to carry it.

I remember when this whole security business came up, there was one physician in the Montreal Neurological Institute who was going to a conference in the States. He asked whether he'd be fingerprinted, if he'd be photographed, and he was told yes, that would have to be done because he comes from the Middle East. He said he was not going to go to the conference.

¹ (1540)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): So they see another bureaucratic nightmare looming on their doorstep. That's something we need to be aware of.

Finally, Ms. Jeffrey--and we all wish we had more time--I commend you on raising the issue of discipline. I've heard that many times from people in your position working with newcomers to Canada. It's sensitive, because it involves a measure of political correctness. I think it is important that you raised it, because it really goes to the issues of respect and stability within the family unit, as it has been constructed. It's problematic to expect those to change overnight, particularly to set up a situation where children feel the authority of their parents can now be completely dismissed and flouted, because they've not been given this freedom in the context of a Canadian upbringing, which our children have received. It is important that we recognize that.

I'm not sure what the answers are, and maybe you don't have any answers either. We certainly don't want children in Canada to be abused in any unacceptable way, but there does have to be some sensitivity. So thank you for raising that.

Also, to all of you, the recognition of credentials is something we hear over and over again. For the first time, the minister raised it at the federal-provincial conference in October in Winnipeg. The premiers and the minister set up a working group--I believe this is correct--to address the issue. But I wonder whether there is anything that can be done at your level to start leaning on the professional, business, and trade groups to say, “Look, guys,”--and some of you mentioned this--“you're hurting yourselves. You're hurting the province. You're wasting resources. You're wasting dues that could flow into your coffers even, by not being open and proactive on this.”

Have you done that, or could there be more done from your level?

Ms. Donna Jeffrey: With the medical issue particularly, I have worked on that since arrival. Being quite innocent, I thought this was wonderful. I was very idealistic in thinking that this was great, we need doctors.... Well, six years of fighting....

It just isn't easy. I know nationally, the Canadian Council for Refugees has been working on this right across Canada. As I said, it's not just a local problem, but it's particularly bad here in the medical area, where they need doctors, and they can't get in.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Well, just know that this committee has raised this issue in every report to the government that I know of for the last many years and will continue to press on this. We know it's a huge issue. I have no idea why the progress on this is so slow. It just seems like a no-brainer for everybody.

Ms. Donna Jeffrey: Oh, yes.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): There's nobody that's going to be hurt by dealing with this situation. Anyway, that's one of the frustrations of being an elected official: sometimes you just can't get it done.

The last thing I want to mention to you, Ms. Jeffrey, concerns your idea of welcoming classes for newcomers and new kids. Has it been tried to put Canadian kids in a reverse situation--in other words, to give them an experience where they go into a cultural setting where they don't know the language and don't know the cultural expectations? They have these starvation watches to know what it's like to be someone in a third-world country. This is the same kind of thing, where you put kids in a situation where they experience for the first time the complete disorientation that their classmates have experienced coming to Canada. Have you ever heard of that, or do you think it would be helpful?

¹ (1545)

Ms. Donna Jeffrey: Not with children, I haven't heard. Have you?

Ms. Lloydetta Quaicoe: No, I haven't heard of that. But I've written and produced and directed a play and invited schoolchildren all across the city to come to it. It looked at a new student coming into a school and the whole issue of integration and acceptance. It has been well received. If I get opportunities to go to the schools, such as during education weeks, I try to then think of a scenario for them that shows what it would be like if they're in the middle of Russia, for example, and couldn't speak English, and their parents were lost and they had to survive—what it would feel like. I think there would be a lot of logistics to work through to actually move them physically to another location, but we could present that in some kind of dramatic form—a medium they could relate to and could accept and understand.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): MPs, for example, sometimes are asked to role-play, as if they have a particular disability. Follow someone with that disability around for a day and you realize sitting in a wheel chair all day and trying to move around is not exactly a piece of cake. It brings it home. That was just a thought I had.

Ms. Donna Jeffrey: I would say with adults we do that in a program we have where we as adults are made to feel as if we're just new to the country. It's a special program that started in Halifax with MISA. It's called Bridging the Gap. With that program, I remember, I had arranged the meeting, and had arranged the person at the desk who would be the immigration officer deciding whether you got through, and to meet them for the appointment. And I became one of the people—and here I had arranged it.

They said I had to take off my shoes, and then I had to wait. I was Mrs. So-and-So and was married to this man and I had so many kids, and I hoped that my story worked. I could not believe it when I went in. And what was very, very interesting was the woman I had put in the place of being the immigration officer had herself come from China—the sweetest person in the world—and suddenly.... And they made me take my shoes off. I don't know what that had to do with it, but I was waiting outside and waiting; I still wasn't in, and I still wasn't in. When I got in—I tried to remember to think, “Oh, dear, now, I'm so scared”—I was actually nervous.

And I thought, “Look, I am just...”. I had never had such a thing happen to me, an experience whereby I thought, “No wonder they sometimes don't answer the right questions when they go in for their immigration visit with the officer”. In other words, you can miss genuine people just because in the visa posts they get so confused.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): I can see that.

Well, this has been very helpful for us. We have gone a little bit overtime because there were four of you and we had so much to discuss, but we will have to adjourn now for just a few minutes while we have another witness come forward.

Thank you so much for coming. We appreciate each and every one of you and what you've presented today.

We will just suspend for a moment.

¹ (1548)

¹ (1555)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): All right, we'll call the meeting to order. Already our time in Newfoundland and Labrador has been very enlightening and very helpful to the committee.

Our next witness is a gentleman who will be a resource person to us, particularly when it comes to our questions and concerns about the new Citizenship Act, Bill C-18. I would like to welcome Mr. Summers.

Thank you for spending your valuable time here. I know you were in court this morning and have things to do, but we believe you will be helpful to us.

If you would first of all give us your background and credentials, so we know particularly how you can assist us, and then members of the committee will simply engage you in discussion, particularly on the act. You may have comments as well on our consideration of a new national identity card, but that's a secondary issue.

Mr. Nick Summers (As Individual): Thank you.

As to my credentials, first off I suppose I should mention I've been, as you said, a lawyer. I've been doing immigration and refugee cases here in Newfoundland for 13 years under various acts, regulations, etc. I'm also at the current time national vice-president of the Canadian Council for Refugees.

When the committee was coming down here, I was contacted and asked if I might be able to appear as a witness. The task was given to me of trying to take what the CCR already said to you and put an Atlantic twist or spin on it. I have to admit I have failed, because the issues that are of most concern to myself and the CCR--I helped draft the brief you already have--are national in scope and really don't have any regional impact. The impacts conceivably are national.

I have not presented you with a new written submission here. As Mr. Pickard mentioned earlier, we don't need more lawyers. Well, we don't need more lawyers' briefs that just say the same thing. I didn't feel that would be a constructive use of your time to have to read through just a rehash of what has already been said to you. So I present myself to you basically as a resource person. If questions have come up that you think might be useful to bounce against me in my role as vice-president of the CCR and somebody who has been involved in these issues for a period of time, then I'm happy to answer questions or engage in debate on issues. I'm more than happy to summarize CCR positions as well, but, as I say, I know you're aware of those, and I don't want to waste your time by repeating what you already know and have heard.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Mr. Summers, we do have a copy of the CCR brief that was presented to the committee in November. I think it would be helpful to us if you were to just emphasize the recommendations that in your view are the most important. If you could prioritize maybe the top two, three, or four for us, I think that would give us some idea of your perspective on it.

Mr. Nick Summers: Sure, that I can do.

Well, let's see. One, there are provisions in the new act with regard to the fact that children born abroad can lose their Canadian citizenship, or if indeed they're second generation cannot get Canadian citizenship unless they apply by a certain age.

Our concern there is that the act does not take into account that the provisions of this act could result in statelessness. Because it is quite possible, and the number of scenarios are set out in the presentation, that a person who has lived most of their life in Canada but who was not born in Canada--these days a lot of people travel abroad for extended periods of time and for various jobs--because they're not aware there's any irregularity about their citizenship could suddenly find themselves stateless.

We've heard some recent cases, I know, that came before the committee of a different provision of the old act that has caused problems. We see similar problems arising in the new act. There should be at the very least, we submit, a provision in the new act that says the provisions do not apply where they would result in statelessness. Canada is a signatory to the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, and as such should not be passing legislation that could end up in producing statelessness.

Also, as part of that, one of the sections in the new act, and I'm afraid I can't quote you the section right off the top of my head, talks about the fact that a person who is stateless--there is a discussion of statelessness in the act--must always have been stateless. Well, there is a growing number of people in the world who were not born stateless but became stateless by acts quite beyond their control.

The biggest single example is the former Soviet Union. Certainly in my practice here in Newfoundland we used to get a great number of claimants coming from the Baltic States. Most of them were people of Russian origin who found themselves no longer welcome in those countries but not welcome in Russia because they'd never lived in Russia. They were born in Estonia or Latvia, but because those countries were reacting against policies of Russification over the years, they were telling Russians, you're no longer welcome here.

We're also asking for the legislation to reflect this and for the provision in the act that says the definition of stateless includes that a person has always been stateless to be amended.

By far the biggest issue with regard to the new act is the lack of due process for people who are at danger of losing their citizenship. There are a number of sections. There's the fact that citizenship can be taken from someone because of misrepresentation. There is the fact that somebody can have their citizenship annulled by the minister if it's within five years of it being granted. And there is the issue of citizenship not being granted to somebody.

In each case there are problems with the due process. In the case of annulment of a person's citizenship, the test is simply that the minister is satisfied that there has been misrepresentation or some other misconduct. Well, what does “satisfied” mean? What level of proof is there? The act says you can ask for judicial review of this, but the case law on the issue of what satisfaction means indicates it's a very low threshold.

We're saying we are treating different citizens with different rights. A Canadian born in Canada has the right to due process and to have a proper judicial decision made with regard to their rights. Yet we're saying this person who is a citizen--we've accepted them as a citizen--can have his citizenship annulled simply on the satisfaction of the minister.

º (1600)

The minister is the decision-maker. It's the minister's officials who bring forward the case. The person is given a summary of the allegations about them, and they're given a chance to respond. But it's the minister who decides. So in effect the minister is both prosecutor and judge. We feel this is an unfair process. There should be at least some quasi-judicial process put in place so that there's not that conflict of interest.

With regard to the issue of refusal of the grant of citizenship, this is even less clear on what the process is. There are some vague terms along the lines that the cabinet or Governor in Council can refuse citizenship if the person has demonstrated--I'm trying to remember the exact wording--flagrant disregard for the values of Canada. Again, there's no challenging that. You can't take the cabinet to Federal Court to review their decision. The person is given only a summary of the allegations against them, and they're given one chance to respond and no hearing. Again, we feel that due process is missing from this act. We are dealing with people who are citizens or who at least in all other respects have earned the right to become citizens, and we feel that they should have that due process.

I think I've lumped together all our recommendations into those two major categories. There are some other minor ones.

º (1605)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): I think it's helpful for you to get them off the top of your head, so to speak, because that assures us that those are the ones that have really stuck in your mind as you considered the act. I can assure you that members of the committee have raised those issues as well.

To explore those further, we'll turn first of all to Madame Dalphond-Guiral.

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: Welcome, Mr. Summers. You are aware that Bill C-18, which is not a bad legislation on the whole, contains provisions that we are deeply concerned with, especially those that provide for revocation of citizenship and those other sections that increase the power of the Minister and take away many from the citizens involved.

Canada is a constitutional state that provides for rights of appeal. There is presently under way in Montreal this much publicized trial of Hells Angels and I have no doubt they will have a right to appeal. They can even go all the way to the Supreme Court. Everybody agrees that these are not very nice people. Therefore, I am very concerned when I see legislation that takes away due process. We have not had the death penalty for a very long time but we all know that in countries where it still exists, there have been cases of miscarriage of justice. But once you are dead, you are dead for a very long time.

So I wonder if, as a society, we should tolerate such a thing under the pretense of state security. One would have to be very naive not to see that in the aftermath of September 11, state security will become a very elastic concept that will be at the whim of our American neighbours. We all know they are in a rather bellicose frame of mind these days. We will be more and more at the mercy of the powerful people of this world and if our laws do not protect our citizens any more, we might become subject to all sorts of excess.

You are a lawyer and therefore a legal expert. Could you provide any examples of citizenship laws in other democratic countries of the world where the state, the Prime Minister, have such latitude for the revocation of citizenship?

[English]

Mr. Nick Summers: I'm not sure if I know of any other state. I don't claim to know the citizenship laws of every country. I have reviewed a number of other countries' citizenship laws for one reason or another over the course of my legal career and working with immigrants and refugees. I cannot call to mind any instance where there is that sort of executive power to revoke citizenship. I'm not saying there isn't, but I'm not aware of one.

I do thank you for raising one important aspect of all this that I didn't mention. It's not just an issue of somebody's citizenship being revoked, because this often leads to them being removed from the country as well. Very often the revocation of citizenship is one step toward deportation. Therefore we're not simply dealing with some ethereal rights of citizenship and whatever that means. We're talking about real consequences to these people. They could be removed from the country and sent back to wherever they originally came from or where their ancestors came from without any thought as to whether there is anything there for them or what they face going back there. Many of these could be refugees or former immigrants who escaped from oppression of one sort or another.

That comes down to the fact that we value rights here in Canada. Most Canadians have ingrained rights that can't be taken from us. Once you're a citizen, you're a citizen. Therefore to have a law that says we can take it away, you have to put really strong structures in place to make sure mistakes are not made.

As you said, in the atmosphere of security and concerns this is probably not the best time to be drafting this sort of law, because it brings with it a certain paranoia, a desire to get them out of Canada as quickly as possible--let's not give the terrorists more than they...let's not help them. But you can't think that way when you're dealing with citizenship. You have to think about a citizen being a citizen.

º (1610)

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: In one of these sections on revocation, there is a reference to evidence that would not be allowed in a court of law. How does one justify using unallowable evidence? This strikes me as being very unreasonable and illogical.

Do you have other examples of such situations? I could imagine there are many in totalitarian countries but I do not think this is what Canada wants to become. It is obviously not the goal of the government, nor of the people, nor of parliament.

[English]

Mr. Nick Summers: As a lawyer who does a lot of administrative law, I guess I'm used to the idea that sometimes these strict rules of evidence can be and are bent for purposes of justice or expediency. I don't always agree with that, but I can appreciate that sometimes strict rules of evidence aren't the proper way to go.

However, as we said in our brief, it is unacceptable that the subject of all of this is not even entitled to know what the evidence is against them. It's bad enough that evidence that would not be acceptable in a court is acceptable to the decision-makers under this act, but all the person who is about to lose their citizenship is given is a summary of the evidence. They have no right to see the actual evidence, to hear their accusers, and to challenge, other than in a general sense, the allegations being made. To me a very fundamental part of the Canadian system is to have the right to directly respond to the evidence against you and to hear that evidence.

I have the same objections about this act as I do about other acts that deal with security. As you are probably aware, this is not the only act that permits this type of hiding of evidence and creating buffers between the person giving the information and the person being accused of some misconduct. I have serious concerns about that because it also often affects immigrants and refugees.

º (1615)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Thank you, Madam.

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: In your opinion, if Bill C-18 were passed without amendments to these sections, would it withstand a Charter challenge or would these provisions be declared unconstitutional? You are going to reply that it depends on the judge.

[English]

Mr. Nick Summers: You're quite correct, of course, that it does very much depend on the judge, although I have a great deal of faith in the Supreme Court of Canada. Luckily we have nine judges, so you're reasonably sure of getting a good reasoned decision.

Courts in the past have permitted this type of behaviour, these types of evidentiary rules, where there is good reason. The Constitution is always subject to the provision that there isn't some overriding concern that balances against the taking away of rights. One of the things the courts have to do is determine whether or not there is some valid ground.

In this case--and again this is just my legal opinion--there would be serious problems for the government in upholding this constitutionally. They would have difficulty justifying the taking away of such a fundamental right for what at this point are hypothetical concerns. They may seem to be important things to the drafters of this legislation, given the climate of terrorism and security, but in the grand scheme of things, if the court looks at the long term--and I hope they will--I think they will agree there is no need for this type of abrogation of people's rights and there should be a due process. I hope I'm right.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): That's interesting. And that's your opinion until you get onto the Supreme Court, right?

Mr. Nick Summers: They haven't been calling, so I'm assuming my appointment is some time away.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Thank you.

Now Mr. Pickard may have some discussion with the witness.

Mr. Jerry Pickard: Thank you very much.

I see your concern, and possibly at this point in history it may not be the best time to debate a bit of this issue.

I do believe Canada is a member of the United Nations. We are a signee of the status of refugees convention. If someone is going to be removed from Canada, we have an obligation not to allow that person to go back to a country where he or she will be endangered. And quite frankly, that is the basis under which anybody could stop someone from being deported from Canada.So I think this is already taken care of in our charter with the United Nations.

The other point that I think is a little more in question is the fact that in some hearings the evidence may not all be clear. The case particularly.... And you know exactly why that information was put there: it may well endanger other people, or the security of this nation.

This may be a difficult point to debate, that is true, but I have to think that leaving a judgment like this to what I would suggest are well-meaning, well-intentioned people, whether it is the cabinet--who I would think would look at those things very seriously and deal with them.... No matter who they are, they certainly are people with good intentions. Whether it's a judge or the cabinet, I'm not sure these people are going to put someone at risk or do some damage to someone without having clear evidence of a particular problem in the case. I would have to think well-intentioned people at that level would look at things very carefully and make sure they make an appropriate decision.

But again, here you're balancing the right of an individual to hear evidence against the right of the society and the right of people who are working for that society to be placed in danger. That's, in my mind, somewhat critical.

Where we talk about evidence in that case, it seems to me to be something that is not just a norm, something taken lightly. I think it is taken very seriously. There are bits of legislation, as you mentioned, that already do this.

It would be interesting, if there is a challenge, how the final results come, but clearly it is the department's legal opinion. I know when we get ten lawyers in a room, we can get fifteen decisions. That's true. But it appears that the legal advice from the department suggests that they can do that, and do it in all good conscience. So again we're dealing with opinions in this case, and possibly it could go forward.

The other issue that does come up is the revocation of citizenship. This is another very serious issue. If a person were to get an automobile by doing something illegal or lying--not taking it to a light case--and someone found out about it later, the question is, can we go back and take that automobile away from that person. That's a simplistic case. Citizenship is not simplistic by any means, but I believe society would do that.

The difficulty we get into with citizenship cases is that if the revocation of the citizenship comes along where the person involved has achieved citizenship by illegal means--there aren't that many cases, but it does happen--does the state spend millions of dollars in order to go through to the Supreme Court of Canada when the case is so very obvious?

º (1620)

I guess the opinion of the people in the department about those expenditures in cases where it's so clear the information is there, when we ask them how many cases this would affect that they look at, is that they involve very few cases. That was the other issue they brought forward: why do you not prosecute and why do you not go forward with cases like that? It is because of the huge cost in resources to take them. They usually end up going right to the Supreme Court, and the costs are enormous to the Canadian taxpayer.

Do we, in a state like Canada, give latitude to those people who have what I would consider the best interests of all in mind? Do we give them any latitude at all? That's really the challenge of this legislation. We can speak very clearly, and I know you will speak very clearly, about the rights of every individual. I think we have to balance all individuals in the society with the costs to society, to ask if there are situations in which this is a practical application, rather than take rights from people. There is a balance there. Would you speak to that balance?

Mr. Nick Summers: Yes, I will respond to a couple of points you made.

First off, we're not taking the position that nobody should ever have his or her citizenship revoked. You're quite right, there are people who have obtained Canadian citizenship fraudulently who don't deserve Canadian citizenship.

What we are saying is that there is a value to all Canadian citizens in ensuring that if you are going to revoke citizenship you do it properly, with due process. We may say that this case or that one is an obvious one, so why waste millions of dollars to take it through the process? I'm not saying every case would take a million dollars, but what do we do when somewhere down the road a less obvious series of cases comes forward?

To stray out of immigration, because of course at the moment we don't have this process, and to look at criminal law, everybody thought Guy Paul Morin was guilty. But mistakes were made. If we didn't have checks and balances in the system—proper appeals and proper judicial consideration of facts—he and many others in similar situations would still be in jail. Injustices happen.

The Canadian way of dealing with that as best we can is to make sure there is a process in place that does its best to make sure those mistakes are caught. What we are saying is that in this Citizenship Act none of those checks and balances are there. Citizenship can be revoked simply on the basis of the minister being satisfied, based on evidence that is not revealed to the person who is about to lose his or her citizenship. That evidence is presented to the minister by his own officials, and he makes the decision. His decision, while reviewable by the courts, is not appealable to the courts; the judge can't put his own decision in place. He can merely make a decision on whether or not the minister made his decision in good faith and whether or not he was properly satisfied on the evidence.

That is not, I would submit, sufficient. We are dealing with fundamental rights here—citizenship rights—and it is a very serious thing to take them away from somebody. They must have some protection.

To give another example, it might seem that somebody is denied citizenship by the cabinet because of his or her supposed criminal convictions in the past, which is one of the grounds for which it can be refused. However, I know, because I've had many clients, that in some countries the criminal justice system is used as a tool of persecution. People are accused of murder, they're convicted of murder, they're convicted of serious property crimes or sexual assaults that are completely made up. Yet these people are never given the opportunity to have a hearing about this, to have it determined that yes, they have a conviction, but despite that they are eligible for Canadian citizenship.

Not to drag out the old cliché, but Nelson Mandela spent twenty years in jail for crimes, yet we have made him an honorary citizen because we recognized that the crimes he was accused of and imprisoned for were trumped up as a method of persecution. There's nothing in this proposed act that protects a person from that sort of process—or not sufficient protection.

I wish I could agree with you that the government, the cabinet, and the minister never make mistakes.

º (1625)

Mr. Jerry Pickard: I didn't say that.

Mr. Nick Summers: I know you didn't. I'm sorry; I'm exaggerating.

Mr. Jerry Pickard: You pointed out court mistakes, not--

Mr. Nick Summers: Courts make mistakes too.

I'm saying that unfortunately everyone makes mistakes. Every agency makes mistakes. Sometimes, from my experience, decisions are made that knowingly cause harm, for reasons of policy or expedience.

To give a very recent example, I don't know how much this committee knows about the issue of directing people back from the American border, but the minister and his officials just three weeks ago made a decision that is already causing hundreds of people to be spending time in jail in America, indefinite imprisonment in America, because they came to the Canadian border to make a claim for refugee status. They were turned back at the border, told to come back in three days or ten days, and when they came back to the American border post, the Americans said no, we're putting you in detention, and they're still there.

So I'm sorry, but the minister unfortunately does make decisions, sometimes for policy reasons, that don't necessarily match what is, to my mind, fundamental justice. I and my organization have a problem with the minister being the judge in cases where these fundamental rights are at risk without some checks and balances, some judicial process.

º (1630)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Thank you, Mr. Pickard.

These are important issues, and I think others have mentioned that when we put legislation in place, it should not be based on our perceived confidence in the good intentions of the minister or the cabinet or the department, but should really preserve our democratic principle of due process and not move toward what's sometimes called palm-tree justice or the old Court of Star Chamber, where a small group of people make decisions that affect the lives, literally, of even one or two citizens.

In the two or three minutes we have remaining, I would like to hear your comments on clause 21 of the bill, which would allow the minister to refuse to grant citizenship to an individual who has “demonstrated a flagrant and serious disregard for the principles and values underlying a free and democratic society”. As a lawyer and somebody who may at some point, if this provision goes through, be called upon--and in fact I'm sure you will--to defend someone, what would your understanding of these words be?

We understand that there will be no regulations that will expand on this or particularize this provision in any way. As a lawyer who will be speaking for people who will be affected by this provision, how you would deal with it? Do you think it is explicit enough and objective enough to allow for due process and for the principles of natural justice to be upheld?

Mr. Nick Summers: The first concern I would have is in how I'm going to get a hearing, because this is of course a decision of the Governor in Council, a cabinet decision. There is no hearing.

The person, as I understand the act, is informed that this concern has been raised. They are given a summary of the evidence upon which the minister will be making his decision, and they are given an opportunity to file a written response. They are not guaranteed a hearing here. If some procedure is brought into place whereby the person can actually have a hearing, and they are able to be represented at that, the first thing I would say is how can you enforce something that is this big? It is a well-known concept in law that a law that is too big is unenforceable. That as well would be perhaps the basis of some constitutional challenge. Certainly many laws have been struck down for vagueness.

The other argument I would make is given that there is no definition and given that the bill enumerates in other parts a list of misconduct for which somebody can have their citizenship revoked, it would seem that the government has already spoken as to what it is that is incompatible with citizenship in Canada. So one would then surely look at the list enumerated--and I can't tell you the clause it's listed in, dealing with the revocation of citizenship--as your guidance. If the person's alleged misconduct doesn't fall within that list, then what is going on here? Why are they being denied their citizenship?

The whole thing is extremely vague. The act really should make clear what it is that's meant by that phrase. I don't know how they're ever going to enforce it. But as I say, who's going to challenge them? There is no judicial process to stop it.

In an analogous case, a number of years ago it was not uncommon for the minister to intervene in refugee claims and to challenge somebody's right to refugee status, to seek exclusion under the convention, because the person was alleged to have contravened the principles and goals of the United Nations, which is one of the “outs” within the convention--that a country can exclude somebody from their process.

The Supreme Court of Canada made some rulings on that in a case called Pushpanathan and a few others, where they made it very clear that there is a very restrictive reading of that. The government simply couldn't use that term as a catch-all for any behaviour that the government of the day found reprehensible. If it wasn't specifically prohibited under the United Nations Charter, then it wasn't. So the government had in the past tried to use general terms as a means of immigration policy, and it didn't work then, so I doubt it will work now.

º (1635)

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Thank you for those comments, and thank you for lending to us your uniquely personal perspective on an expansion on the CCR brief we have already considered. We appreciate your time in coming before us, and we hope we may be able to contact you by e-mail or phone if we'd like to follow up with you.

Mr. Nick Summers: So agreed. I'll file it with you.

It's off-topic and I guess we're basically done. I had mentioned the “direct-backs”, and again I don't know if the committee.... This is not relating to the Citizenship Act, but it is related to the work of this committee in overseeing to some extent the minister. I have some information that I would like to distribute with regard to that, because I think it's an issue that is going to become more public and more contentious over the next few weeks and months. I would like to assist in your education, if I might, so I have some material I'd like to give you.

The Acting Chair (Mrs. Diane Ablonczy): Well, we appreciate the fact that you would come and give us the benefit of your experience, so yes, we would very much like to receive the information you have. We'll ask the clerk to distribute it to us and we'll study it and get back to you with any comments or concerns we might have. Great. Thank you.

We'll adjourn the meeting as of now. Thank you.