CIMM Committee Report

NDP Supplementary Report  on the CIMM Study  on TEMPORARY RESIDENT VISAS FOR VISITORS

Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, MP for Pierrefonds-Dollard

Rathika Sitsabaiesan, MP for Scarborough—Rouge River

Jasbir Sandhu, MP for Surrey North

Over the course of several meetings and after having listened to the testimony of various CIC officials and dozens of witnesses, the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration (CIMM) studied issues surrounding

around the integrity of the system of temporary resident visas for visitors, the cost and practical implications of introducing an appeal mechanism as well as comparisons of Canada’s visitor visa system with programs in peer countries. While witnesses presented relatively balanced views on the subject, regrettably the final report does not reflect this.

Letters of Invitation

The report largely ignored by the report is witness testimony that suggested that “CIC create two new forms to accompany the TRV application; one would be an actual letter of invitation that sets out all the information that CIC is looking for to assess these applications, as well as the accompanying documents that may or must be included”[1].   .

RECOMMENDATION

That the Government of Canada consider conceiving a template letter of invitation, in a PDF fillable format that can be uploaded within the system and set out all of the required  details for a letter of invitation.

Visa requirements

The NDP agrees that managing the flow of visitors to Canada is important but also recognizes that the way it is done by the Canadian government at the moment comes at a cost to Canadian families and Canadian businesses.

Pr. Lenard concurs: “I will only say about security that when the security of Canadians is at risk, we must err on the side of mistrust. The consequences of mistakes in this domain are too high. The visa is a symbol of trust, and where security is at risk, we cannot make a mistake. But where the concern is overstaying, we must err on the side of trust. Although we currently lack data about the number of overstayers, as many people who have been before this committee have said, I believe nevertheless that we have reasons to conclude that the cost of these lost migrants is small, and that the harm to Canadians is minimal. […] The harm we cause in denying visas is to Canadians who want to associate with them. Those who are calling their MPs and wondering why their families and friends are being prevented from visiting are Canadians. It is Canadians who are owed explanations when their visitors are denied leave to enter.”[2]

Both Richard Kurland and Betsy Kane have suggested that a sponsorship bond or cash bond be requested as an alternative to solely refusing temporary resident visa applications.[3]

RECOMMENDATION

That the Government of Canada study the effectiveness and costs of introducing bond requirements and other options for meritorious family-related cases with a view to ensuring that bona fide visitors with family in Canada have the opportunity to visit while maintaining the integrity of the visitor visa system.

Business travelling

Mr. Daniel-Robert Gooch, President of the Canadian Airport Council, testified, before this committee that “The application process today is cumbersome, as my learned colleagues have outlined. It asks for a lot of information; is paper based in many cases; requires a traveller in many cases to surrender their passport, and I'll speak to this; and may entail long-distance travel for interviews, if they have to take place in person. Delays are an issue, particularly for business travellers. Business travel often needs to be arranged within days, not weeks or months. That's the speed in which business operates. We like to say that a visa delayed is essentially a visa denied, particularly when it comes to business travel. Surrendering of passports can be a non-starter, especially for frequent travellers.”[4]

Tourism

Similarly, processing times and rejection rates continue to be cited as one of the biggest challenges for business and leisure travellers coming to Canada according to the Tourism Industry Association of Canada (TIAC).[5]  As a result, in the fall of 2011, the National Round Table on Travel and Tourism (NRTT) made six specific recommendations to CIC to address key challenges with the visa process, including that of “transferring visas from an expired passport to a new passport to bring [Canada] in line with the UK, US and NZ”[6]  More recently, TIAC has made other recommendations to facilitate TRV application process and obtainment, among them: reducing red tape by simplifying the visa application process in a number of areas and reinvesting visa administration revenues into ongoing and sustainable CIC funding.[7]  It is the opinion of the Official Opposition that these recommendations, at a minimum, warrant discussion and study, particularly given that the Greater Niagara Chamber of Commerce, in preparation to the 2015 Pan Am/Parapan American Games, also recommends that “the government reinvests some of the $400 million it collects annually from visa administration fees and reinvest a portion in Canada’s visa processing capacity[…]”[8]

Professor Mel Cappe of the University of Toronto, School of Public Policy and Governance has noted, while discussing the discretion and authority of visa officers that one of the solutions to reducing processing times and deciphering rejection rates would be to provide these visa officers: “with administratively clear instructions and good training on how to administer their discretion and how to deliver the program. In that context, research will help in providing indicia of future performance and indications of what works and what does not. Relying on evidence to design a system is highly desirable. Evidence is not always used in policy development, and it should be in this case.”[9]

RECOMMENDATION

That the Government of Canada use evidence based policy when introducing new regulations and systems for the visa application system.

Letters of denials of visa applications

In March 2012, Don Davies (Vancouver-Kingsway) introduced a bill requiring the government to provide a detailed explanation when applicants are denied a temporary resident visa or visitor visa.  When moving for leave to introduce the bill, Mr. Davies stated: “Every day in this country Canadians learn that their friends or family members have been denied a visa to come to Canada. This disappointment is often compounded by bewilderment because they are not given detailed reasons for the denial.  The very least we could do when denying a visa to visit Canada is tell people why the application was denied. This initiative would help Canadians and people around the world understand our immigration system better, provide transparency and greater accountability.”[10]

Applicants who have had their visitor visa applications rejected do not often receive many details as to why their application was terminated. This makes it difficult for applicants to understand what went wrong during the process, making it almost impossible to fix the issue for when they reapply. Citizenship and Immigration Canada in most cases has the information needed to explain why an applicant was rejected. Providing this to rejected applicants would help make the reapplication process faster and cut down on the intake of incorrect applications for CIC staff and officers. Nevertheless, here we are, in 2014, and experts are still pressing the government to include more information in refusal letters to visa applicants.  Ms. Betsy Kane, testified, on December 3^rd, 2013, that “We all are tired of seeing those boilerplate letters, which are completely useless. We all know that the only real way to find out why the visa was refused is to either do an access to information request or to go to our members of Parliament. If CIC were more transparent on the front end and either had a larger boilerplate letter or had the opportunity to put in a few lines similar to what they're already putting in the GCMS, at least the applicant would have knowledge as to why they were refused [...]”[11]

RECOMMENDATION

That the Government of Canada review its use of template letters of refusal for visitor visa applications in order to give the actual reasons to failed applicants.