The House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration met to study Bill C-12, an act concerning border security and immigration system integrity. Witnesses included Manon Brassard, Chairperson of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB); Roula Eatrides, Deputy Chairperson of the Refugee Protection Division; Julia Green from the Association québécoise des avocats et avocates en droit de l’immigration; Simon Wallace from the Refugee Law Lab; and Deanna Okun-Nachoff and Cheryl Robinson from the Canadian Bar Association.
Manon Brassard described the IRB’s challenges, noting a record inventory of about 290,000 asylum claims, with one-third incomplete due to missing documents or security screening. She stated that new claims now face a 44-month wait for a decision, and the IRB finalized 78,000 decisions last year against a funded capacity of 70,000. She recommended front-end security screening and earlier ministerial interventions to improve efficiency, and noted that Bill C-12 could reduce intake by making some claimants ineligible for IRB referral.
Roula Eatrides clarified that claimants who leave Canada and return are ineligible to pursue a new claim, and that incomplete applications may be abandoned after about six months if no valid reason is provided. She did not make specific recommendations beyond supporting the IRB’s current processes.
Julia Green argued that Bill C-12 would prevent two groups—those in Canada over a year and those entering irregularly from the U.S.—from making asylum claims, leaving them only with a pre-removal risk assessment (PRRA). She warned that PRRAs lack oral hearings, appeals, and a stay of removal, risking harm to vulnerable people, especially those from moratorium countries like Haiti. She recommended removing the proposed ineligibility provisions or adding exceptions for domestic violence, minors, LGBTQ+ claimants, and changed country conditions.
Simon Wallace presented empirical data showing that the IRB and its Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) are efficient, with Federal Court upholding 95% of RAD decisions, while nearly 40% of PRRA decisions are overturned or settled in court. He argued that Bill C-12 would transfer cases from a well-functioning system to a less robust one, increasing Federal Court workloads and overall inefficiency. He did not propose specific amendments but warned of likely constitutional challenges.
Deanna Okun-Nachoff criticized Bill C-12 for enabling mass cancellations of applications by order in council with vague “public interest” language, bypassing normal regulatory review. She said this could harm Canada’s reputation and attract litigation, and recommended pulling the bill for further study or adding requirements for prepublication and parliamentary oversight.
Cheryl Robinson raised concerns about the one-year claim bar, noting it ignores that risk can arise after entry, such as from changed country conditions or personal realizations about sexual orientation. She also worried that designated representatives could make substitute decisions without independent oversight. She argued that diverting cases to PRRAs would increase Federal Court litigation and recommended amendments to tie the one-year clock to the most recent entry and to include exceptions for vulnerable groups.
The committee also debated procedural points, including a dispute over the scope of benefits for asylum seekers under the interim federal health program, but no motions or votes were recorded in the transcript.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors; verify against the official evidence.