Much of the media attention towards Bill C-31 – the Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act – has been focused on its shortening of the time periods for processing refugee claims and its removal of some appeal rights for refugee claimants that were supposed to be introduced under the Balanced Refugee Reform Act. This past week, members of the immigration bar raised concerns about another questionable change. In short, Bill C-31 will make it so that refugees who became permanent residents of Canada will lose their permanent residence status if their refugee status ceases. Currently, the Immigration and Refugee Board may cease a person’s refugee status. Amongst other reasons, it may do so if the reasons for which the person sought refugee protection have ceased to exist, or if the person reavails himself to the protection of his country of origin. Until now, the cessation of refugee status did not result in the loss of permanent resident status. Accordingly, ceasing a refugee’s refugee status was rarely pursued where the refugee had become a permanent resident. Bill C-31, however, changes this. It provides that when the IRB ceases a refugee’s refugee status, then the former refugee also loses his/her permanent resident status. … Read More
Was Bill C-37 Worth the Political Cost?
On February 16, Jason Kenney and the Conservative government introduced Bill C-31, the Protecting Canada’s Immigration Act. The Act makes many reforms to Canada’s refugee system, and amends previous amendments to Canada’s immigration legislation contained in the Balanced Refugee Reform Act which have not yet come into affect. Bill C-31 was greeted by many refugee lawyers and advocates with much criticism, and was received with particular indignation from the New Democratic Party. It is not difficult to see why the NDP was outraged by the introduction of Bill C-31. Less than two years ago, the Conservatives and the NDP worked together to introduce the Balanced Refugee Reform Act. Its passage was seen as a good example of compromise, and how the parties in a minority Parliament can cooperate to introduce what was generally viewed as good legislation. I would also imagine that the NDP spent some political capital with its base by cooperating with the Conservatives and to makeCanada’s refugee system stricter. Minister Kenney has now thrown all of that to the wind. By abandoning the grand compromise that was the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, Mr. Kenney has taken several political risks. First, he has abandoned any good-will that he … Read More
Where do Immigrant Investor Funds Go In BC?
One of the questions that I am most frequently asked is “where does British Columbia’s money from the Immigrant Investor Program go?” Indeed, at least two people today e-mailed me this question after they read an article in the China Daily about how $1.6-billion left China due to emigration under various investor scheme. The answer can be found on the the B.C. Immigrant Investment Fund Ltd.’s (the “BC IIF”) website. The BCIIF receives and manages British Columbia’s portion of funds under the Immigrant Investor Program. Their 2011-2014 Service Plan can be found here. According to the website and the 2011-2014 Service Plan, some of the money from the Immigrant Investor Program has been spent on the following projects: Loaning $60-million to aid in the construction of the BCIT aerospace facility near the Vancouver International Airport; Loaning $5-million to help facilitate the purchase of the University of Victoria Technology Enterprise Facility, which accommodates the Centre for Addictions Research B.C., the NEPTUNE Canada Research Project, and the Venus Research Project. Loaning $13.9-million for the construction of a student residence at the University of the Fraser Valley. Loaning $3.3-million for the construction of two residences at the Nicola Valley Institute of Technology. Loaning … Read More
Certified Question on Section 7 Charter Rights
Does the Immigration and Refugee Board (“IRB”) violate the provisions of section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the “Charter”) if it declines to postpone a hearing based on risk to life where there is a pending humanitarian and compassionate application also based on risk to life? The above question was certified by the Federal Court in Laidlow v. Canada, 2012 FC 144, released today. The Federal Court of Appeal will soon answer the question. The facts in Laidlow giving rise to the question were essentially that an individual had a pending H&C claim which was based on risk to life (availability of medical treatment reasons) at the time that he appeared for his refugee hearing. He asked that the refugee hearing be adjourned until the H&C application was determined. The IRB refused to do so, and heard the refugee claim, which was dismissed. The Court’s answer to the question was that refusing to adjourn the hearing did not breach section 7 of the Charter. Relying on Poshteh v. Canada, [2005] 3 FCR 487, and Gosselin v. Quebec (Attorney General of Canada), [2005] 4 SCR 429, the Court articulated the following principles: A finding of inadmissibility does … Read More
Open Marriages and the Family Class
Canadian immigration law allows people to sponsor their spouses or common-law partners to immigrate to Canada. A question that often arises is whether open relationships count. Multiple Spouses or Common-Law Partners Canadian immigration law is clear that a person cannot have more than one spouse or more than one common-law partner for the purpose of immigration. . Section 119(9)(c) of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations provides that a person cannot sponsor someone if the prospective immigrant is the Canadian’s spouse and (i) the sponsor or the foreign national was, at the time of their marriage, the spouse of another person, or (ii) the sponsor has lived separate and apart from the foreign national for at least one year and either the sponsor is the common-law partner of another person or the foreign national is the common-law partner of another person. On the issue of polygamous marriages, section 13.2 of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s Overseas Processing Manual 2 – Processing Members of the Family Class (the “Guidelines”) further states that: Polygamous marriages Officers must counsel both parties that polygamy is an offence under the Criminal Code of Canada. R117(9)(c)(i) states that a spouse is not a member of the family class if … Read More
Removing Flags at the Port of Entry
I was recently asked where one can learn how to request that an “enforcement flag” against them be removed so that an individual does not have to go to a secondary examination every time they enter Canada. This is actually a question that comes up rather frequently, so for all those who are interested, here is the relevant section from the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada Manual: There are other ways to remove enforcement flags where the procedure outlined above is not working.
Do People in the International Transportation Industry Require Work Permits?
Many people who work for industries that involve the international transport of cargo and passengers frequently enter Canada. These include truck drivers, bus drivers, shipping and airline personnel. We often receive inquiries as to whether these individuals require work permits. Maritime Travel The determination of whether crew on a maritime vessel require a Work Permit to work in Canada depends on whether the vessel meets the definition of “coasting trade” as defined in Canada’s Coasting Trading Act, SC 1992, c 31. The Coasting Trade Act defines “Coasting Trade” as: the carriage of goods or passengers by ship… from one place in Canada… to any other place in Canada… either directly or by way of a place outside Canada. Subject to certain exceptions, when a vessel meets the above definition of “coasting trade”, then the vessel’s foreign crew will require a work permit to work in Canada. The reason is because the vessel is involved in cabotage (domestic transportation of goods and services) activities within Canada’s domestic labour market. A helpful indicator of whether a foreign vessel meets the definition of “Coasting Trade” is whether the vessel is required to possess a coasting trade license. If it does, then it is very … Read More
Summary of the Evaluation of the Provincial Nominee Program
Citizenship and Immigration Canada has released its Evaluation of the Provincial Nominee Program. The report was almost overwhelmingly positive, especially on how the program operates in British Columbia. The report can be found here: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pdf/research-stats/evaluation-pnp2011.pdf In brief, the report noted that: The vast majority of provincial nominees are becoming established economically; The majority of provincial nominees have jobs at a skill level equivalent to their intended occupations; The retention rate varies from province to province, with BC and Alberta having a retention rate of over 95%; and That provincial nominees generally earn more than other immigrants. Nonetheless, under what I guess is the mantra of “if it ain’t broke we’d better fix it”, the report contains 4 recommendations. The recommendations, and the government’s action plan on them, are below. I have put the recommendation in bold, the government’s action plan (with assorted proposed completion dates) in a table below. I have also provided a brief commentary below the table. (The Report actually contains 5 recommendations. However, as the 5th recommendation appears to relate solely to scheduling future task forces, working groups, etc.., I have not included it below.) 1. CIC should work with provinces to develop a requirement for minimum … Read More
PNP Reference Letter Requirement Gone -> Supplementary Travels Next Please
Earlier this week CIC removed the proof of work experience and proof of education experience requirements from the PNP checklist. This came after intensive lobbying from numerous provinces, immigration lawyers / consultants, and, I speculate, people within CIC. I think that the next target should be the IMM5562 – Supplementary Information – Your Travels form. This form asks applicants to list every country that they have visited outside of Canada and their country of nationality since they either turned 18 or during the 10 year period preceding the application. No matter how short the duration, applicants are expected to list every country that they have ever visited. British citizen visiting Paris for a day for business? Required to inform the government. American visiting Cancun? Required to inform the government. Whatever the benefit that this form provides, and I cannot think of what the benefit is, it is surely outweighed by the hassle that it causes frequent travellers to complete it.
Alternatives to a Labour Market Impact Assessment
You’ve been working in Whistler on a one-year working holiday visa and you want to stay and work for another season. Or maybe you’re a former post-secondary student in Toronto who has six months remaining on your post-graduate work permit and you want to keep working for your company. Perhaps you’re a foreign worker who just wants to renew your work permit. You start talking to friends and colleagues, and you hear horror stories about what they call a Labour Market Impact Assessment, or LMIA. You learn about the process that companies go through to hire foreign workers, and begin to wonder if your employer will even bother. You start wondering if your future in Canada is as certain as you thought. Do You Need an LMIA? To understand how to approach the application for a Labour Market Impact Assessment it is important to understand the theory behind it, and to determine whether you actually need one. The purpose of Canada’s Temporary Foreign Worker Program is to allow Canadian employers to hire foreign workers on a temporary basis. In order to protect the Canadian Labour Market, the government has determined that Canadian employers must show that it was necessary to … Read More