Speaking notes – Remarks by the Honourable Jason Kenney, P.C., M.P. Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism an balanced refugee reform

Ottawa, Ontario, March 30, 2010

As Delivered

Thank you very much and good morning to everyone. It’s a pleasure for me to be here today to launch a fair and balanced reform of Canada’s asylum system.

I am very pleased to be with you this morning following the introduction of Bill C-11, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act. This legislation is essential to fix serious problems in Canada’s asylum system. It’s part of a package of reforms that will reinforce Canada’s tradition as a place of refuge for victims of persecution and violence while discouraging abuse of our laws and of our generosity. These balanced reforms will deliver fast and fairer decisions on asylum claims. That means faster protection for bona fide refugees, and faster removal for false asylum claimants.

This bill is essential to improve Canada’s asylum system. Our objective is to deliver quicker decisions on asylum claims, to provide faster protection to those truly in need of it, and to provide faster removal for those who do not need our protection.

Canada has a long and proud history of providing protection to the vulnerable. This protection extends both to resettling refugees from abroad and to those who seek asylum at our borders, and who go on to successfully be granted refugee status. The legislation that I brought to the House today reinforces this commitment. This legislation also addresses the fact that our generosity is too often abused by false asylum claimants who come here and do not need our protection. They’re misusing the asylum system to jump the immigration queue rather than waiting their turn like everyone else. This undermines the integrity of our immigration system, is fundamentally unfair to hundreds of thousands of immigrants patiently waiting to come here the legal way, and it undermines public confidence in and support for our refugee system.

Also, it addresses the fact that many people abuse Canada’s generosity and many claimants don’t need our protection. They try to enter the country through the back door and they take advantage of our asylum system to avoid waiting in line like everyone should for their application to be processed.

58 percent of asylum claims processed by the Immigration and Refugee Board are subsequently rejected by the board, abandoned or withdrawn by claimants. You only have to search the World Wide Web to find sites that promote making fraudulent asylum claims as an easy way to get into Canada and remain here for years.

58 percent of all claims processed by the Immigration and Refugee Board are subsequently rejected by the board, abandoned or withdrawn by claimants.

I’ll just give you one example. I just saw a website that offered advice, for a fee of course, on how to enter Canada as a tourist and then make a false asylum claim. People are openly, publicly selling fraudulent information on how to gain the system. A couple of years ago, a Toronto Star investigative report into this sort of practice concluded that, quote, “The false refugee gambit is not uncommon. Canada’s refugee system was created to provide a haven for people with a well-founded fear of persecution. It’s also vulnerable to abuse. Unsuitable candidates bog down a bureaucracy set up to provide haven to those facing persecution and abuse. That in turn lengthens the wait for immigrants who don’t jump the queue.”

Last year we received, just to give you one example of how this is problematic, last year we received about 2500 asylum claims from a democratic member-state of the European Union. This country is now our number one source country for asylum claims. But 97 percent of the claims from that country last year, and so far this year, were either withdrawn or abandoned by the claimants, effectively telling us they don’t need Canada’s protection. And of those that went forward to the IRB for a decision, only one percent, less than one percent were granted protection, deemed to be well-founded claims of persecution.

Now, amongst some of the people who have come to the country through this process, there is now a police investigation into human trafficking with the claimants…who have since withdrawn their claims, alleging that they were trafficked into Canada, coached into making false claims in order to register for welfare and other social benefits with the proceeds going to a criminal network. This is unacceptable. We must act to end this sort of abuse and exploitation. As the Auditor General has said, our current system is vulnerable to and in fact encourages abuse. On average, it takes 19 months, over a year and a half for claimants to receive a hearing on their claim. And I believe that is fundamentally wrong for those who come here who are bona fide refugees, it is totally unreasonable for us to tell them to wait for 19 months, and that’s because a large part of the flood of false claims clogging up the system.

On average, it takes four and a half years from the time a claim is initially made until all legal avenues are exhausted and a failed asylum claimant is removed from Canada. But in some cases, in extreme cases the time period can jump to ten years or more as people exploit multiple appeals and procedures. That’s simply too long. For those whose claim is unfounded, such a delay may suit them just fine. They can work with a work permit, receive health coverage from taxpayers, and even collect social assistance while they exhaust all processes to extend their stay and avoid removal. So it’s little wonder that many people who may not truly be in need of our protection take their chances and seek asylum. But for those who truly need our help, 19 months is too long to wait.

I’ve introduced Bill C-11 to address this issue. This bill will enable Canada to strengthen its asylum system while respected its legal, national and international obligations. It will make our system faster and less open to abuse.

So to address these problems, I’ve introduced Bill C-11. This would strengthen our system while ensuring Canada continues not just to meet but to exceed our international and domestic legal obligations under the international conventions on refugees, on torture and on the Charter of Rights. And it would generally provide a hearing for persons in need of Canada’s protection within 60 days and not 19 months.

Let me also point out that under the reform package, a officer at the triage interview level would be able to identify someone that he or she believes is a clearly bona fide refugee claimant in need of our protection and recommend then for priority consideration at the refugee protection division. What does that mean? That someone who’s just gotten off a plane, who somehow managed to get out of a prison in Iran or in North Korea, who arrives at one of our airports, won’t have to wait a year and a half for protection, but could receive it in a matter of weeks.

As I’ve just said, their claim might be processed even more quickly, depending on the recommendation of a triage interview officer. So the bill recommends the creation of a new refugee appeal decision at the independent IRB that would go beyond any of the appeal processes proposed in private members’ bills.

Bill C-11 would also allow Canada to develop a list of safe countries of origin.

The refugee appeal division at the independent IRB would go beyond any of the appeal processes contemplated in various private members’ bills, or in fact that has been dormant in the immigration refugee protection act since 2002. It would allow Canada to follow the example of many western liberal democracies in developing a list of safe countries of origin, not to restrict access, but to streamline the process.

Last week I had the opportunity to meet with United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Antonio Gutierrez, former Prime Minister of Portugal. He came here in person to pay tribute to the generosity of the Canadian people and to our commitment to refugee protection. He said, and I quote, “There are indeed safe countries of origin. There are indeed countries in which there is a presumption that refugee claims will probably not be as strong as in other countries.”

High Commissioner Gutierrez said that such a list can work and does work in some other countries if the countries placed on the list are promptly classified and that if access to the asylum system is not restricted. What we are proposing in today’s legislation clearly meets those standards. While the criteria for a list of safe countries of origin would be outlined in regulations, the list would include democratic countries that have a robust human rights record, that offer strong state protection and do not normally produce refugees. We would consult the UNHCR in its formulation. But I should also stress that, like all eligible refugee claimants, those from designated safe countries of origin would continue to receive a fair hearing on the merits of their claim before the IRB. There will be no restriction of access. They could also ask the federal court to review the decision on their claim if they fail at first instance. But we would limit their access to the refugee appeal division and other appeals.

As important as it is to achieve faster decisions on claims, it’s equally important that we quickly remove failed claimants. And the reason we need the safe country of origin list is to have an additional tool to deal with what we often face, which are large spikes of claims that typically are very well organized and typically come from democratic countries. In 2004 it was Costa Rica, 2000 claims, 99 percent of which were rejected at the IRB. Between 2006 and last summer, we saw a similar process developing from Mexico, and today we have a similar pattern developing from an EU member state. And so this is simply a tool to help us to address those kinds of massive spikes of unfounded claims that can end up burdening the system.

By shortening the time failed claimants remain in Canada, we will reduce the costs faced by provincial governments. We estimate based on…this is not an exact science, but we estimate that the overall cost savings, which will be principally at the benefit of the provincial governments, will be in the range of $1.8 billion. For example, under the current system, we estimate that the average cost for a failed asylum claimant who uses social assistance while in Canada is $50,000. Under the proposed asylum system, we estimate that this would drop to roughly $29,000 per failed asylum claimant as a result of a faster decision-making process and quicker removals.

We also anticipate that these reforms will over time lead to a substantial reduction in the number of false asylum claims being made in Canada as would-be queue jumpers realize that they will face timely removal if they come to Canada. I should also mention that the package provides for additional resources for a security screen. Everyone will continue to be eligible to make an asylum claim in Canada, as long as they are admissible for permanent residency; so in other words, people who are involved in serious criminality, terrorism, espionage, crimes against humanity or war crimes would be screened out, and there would be additional resources in place to ensure that those screens are effective.

I should also say that as a result of actions that we took last year and the fact that the IRB is operating at a full complement, the backlog in asylum claims is now going down. There are additional resources in this package to reduce the backlog even further, and the anticipated reduction in claims, in false claims means that we will see even more progress in reducing backlog. These changes would allow us to make investments as well in programs to process refugees overseas as I announced yesterday, with our increased of some 20 percent in the number of resettled refugees, many of whom are living in UN camps or urban slums. They will now have a new beginning in Canada as a result of today’s package.

These changes would allow us to make investments in programs to process refugees oversees, and as I announced yesterday, we plan to increase the number of refugees we resettle each year by 2500, 500 more government-assisted refugees, and 2000 more privately sponsored refugees. In total Canada would resettle as many as 14,500 refugees a year, more than one out of ten refugees resettled around the world, second only to the United States. In addition, we would increase the refugee assistance program funding to $54 million, as an increase of about 20 percent, in order to help the government-assisted refugees to successfully integrate into Canadian society. While fixing our broken in-Canada system, we’ll increase the generosity of our overseas system. This is why improvements to the overseas and in-Canada asylum programs are being pursued together, with changes to both being contingent on our legislation being passed by Parliament.

To conclude, I want to point out that our research, public opinion research indicates that this is responding to a very strong expectation on the part of the Canadian people. According to polling research, 84 percent of Canadians agree that the government should take steps to reform the asylum system. By a margin of three to one, Canadians agree that “legitimate refugees” suffer when Canada must spend time and resources on those whose claims are determined to be unfounded. And a margin of four to one polled say that they agree that more needs to be done to quickly remove from Canada people whose claims are rejected. That is a compelling public consensus, and I am confident it will be reflected in a strong Parliamentary consensus.

A strong majority of Canadians, 84 percent, agree that the government should take steps to reform the asylum system, and this is exactly the purpose of the changes that we are proposing today. These changes could speed up our asylum system without sacrificing fairness by allowing us to make faster decisions and expedite removals of failed claimants. These changes will deter applications from those who might try to abuse our system and, as a result, these changes will ensure that Canada’s doors stay open, and that we better help those who truly need our protection.

Thank you very much.