Skip to main content

Inland Protection

Access to health

Resolution number
12
Whereas
  1. Some of the provincial health insurance plans (such as OHIP in Ontario) do not provide provincial health insurance coverage for “family members” of protected persons who are residing in Canada and who are being processed for permanent resident status simultaneously with the protected person;
  2. It is a waste of resources to have to make a refugee claim for these family members in Canada just so that they will have IFH coverage;
Therefore be it resolved

That the CCR request all provincial health ministers to ensure that the family members of protected persons are eligible for provincial health insurance coverage.

Working Group
Inland Protection
Subject
Health

Delays in applying for permanent residence

Resolution number
11
Whereas
  1. There are many protected persons who delay in applying for landing beyond the 180 days because of their inability to raise the $550 cost recovery fee, or other valid reasons;
  2. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has not yet satisfactorily responded to the CCR request to eliminate the $550 processing fee for protected persons;
  3. The IP5 Guidelines state incorrectly that protected persons who apply late for landing and are being processed as humanitarian and compassionate cases, must meet all the normal admissibility criteria for immigrants, including medical, financial and identity document criteria.
  4. Protected persons who are being processed as H&C cases and who don’t have “satisfactory identity documents” are being refused landing.
Therefore be it resolved

That CCR request CIC to amend the IP5 Guidelines to correct this misunderstanding and to clarify that protected persons continue to be exempt from medical and financial criteria for landing and to benefit from other provisions to facilitate the landing of protected persons including special provisions for identity documents when the protected person is unable to obtain a passport to confirm identity.

Working Group
Inland Protection
Subject
Permanent residence

Delaying the day

Resolution number
14
Whereas
  1. The IRB will not conduct any refugee determination hearings until claimants have received security clearances;
  2. IRPA requires that hearings be held expeditiously;

Therefore be it resolved

That the CCR request the IRB to set a strict 6 month time limit for delaying a hearing to allow for the security clearance, so that refugee claimants who are ready to proceed can have their hearings in a timely manner as required by IRPA.

Working Group
Inland Protection
Subject
IRB
Security inadmissibility

Protected persons documents

Resolution number
13
Whereas
  1. Protected Persons require Protected Persons Status documents to apply for Canada Student Loans and for Canadian refugee travel documents;
  2. Some Protected Persons, particularly those with landing delays (for whatever reason),are issued Protected Persons Status documents with a validity of six months;
  3. The six month limit prevents both acquisition of loans and the ability to travel outside of Canada:
Therefore be it resolved

That the CCR request that Citizenship and Immigration Canada adopt as policy that all Protected Persons Status documents have a validity for a minimum of two years.

Working Group
Inland Protection

Excluded family members

Resolution number
12
Whereas
  1. IRPA Regulation 117(9)(d) provides for a lifetime exclusion from sponsoring a family member, with no discretion to consider an explanation, however compelling, or to impose a lesser period of exclusion;
  2. Ina significant number of cases, there has been no intention to misrepresent and, in other cases, there are mitigating circumstances that may constitute justification;
  3. The application of this article is having an extremely detrimental impact on many innocent children, in violation of Canada’s obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child to take into account the “best interests of the child” concerned in any decision of a public body;
  4. IRPA provides for a general inadmissibility of two years in cases of misrepresentation and officers have considerable discretion as to whether even that inadmissibility should be imposed;
Therefore be it resolved

That the CCR call for IRPA Reg. 117(9)(d) to be rescinded. Officers should be required to consider all the facts of the case, including intention and any mitigating circumstances, in deciding whether to impose an exclusion, which should in no case exceed the two years provided for generally under IRPA.

Working Group
Inland Protection
Subject
Family reunification

Immigration levels

Resolution number
11
Whereas
  1. Current limits on the numbers of immigrants and refugees who can come to Canada each year and the unequal division of these numbers between economic and humanitarian classes of immigrants have resulted in long waiting periods for the re-unification of families and the admission of sponsored refugees;
  2. The limits on and division of immigrant and refugee numbers appear to be arbitrary and to have been set without public consultation;
  3. It is widely recognized that family reunification is taking too long and the delays in the processing are causing great hardship;
  4. The group with the most pressing need for family re-unification is refugees;
Therefore be it resolved

That the CCR call upon the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to:

  1. Commit to an increase in immigration levels.
  2. Commit to a full and transparent review of immigration levels which review will have a meaningful consultation with NGO stakeholders at all stages of review. Among the topics which should be examined in the review are the benefits of increasing the number of immigrants and refugees admitted to Canada each year; and whether the division of admissions between economic and humanitarian classes is fair or necessary.
  3. Pending the review of immigration levels, increase the number of persons admitted to Canada each year by a sufficient number to allow for overseas family members included in inland applicants to be admitted immediately for processing in Canada.
Working Group
Inland Protection
Subject
Family reunification
Levels

H&C and medical inadmissibility

Resolution number
11
Whereas
  1. Section 25(1) of IRPA grants the Minister broad discretionary authority to exempt an inadmissible person from any provisions of the Act or Regulations, if there are humanitarian and compassionate reasons for doing so;
  2. The Regulations severely restrict this broad discretionary authority by requiring persons who are approved in principle for landing on H&C grounds to meet all admissibility requirements in order to be landed, including medical admissibility;
  3. A person who receives a positive H&C decision and who is found medically inadmissible is refused landing and may face removal from Canada to a place where their life is at risk, or, if granted a temporary resident permit (TRP) for three years, may then be denied provincial health insurance coverage during the three year TRP period and thus face a risk to their life due to inability to access adequate medical care in Canada;
  4. Applying the criterion of medical inadmissibility to a person who has been granted approval in principle on H&C grounds constitutes discrimination contrary to section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and is an improper fettering of the Minister’s discretion under section 25(1) of IRPA;
Therefore be it resolved

That the CCR request an amendment to the Regulations requiring that a person who is granted approval in principle for landing on H&C grounds be exempt from medical admissibility criteria and be landed without delay.

Working Group
Inland Protection
Subject
Health
H&C

Bilingualism

Resolution number
5
Whereas
the CCR has a policy on bilingualism adopted by the executive committee on 2 February 1992;
Therefore be it resolved

That the CCR include, as far as it is possible, at least one panelist intervening in French and offer simultaneous translation for each panel.

Working Group
Inland Protection

Proposal for the regularization of individuals and families without status

Resolution number
4
Whereas
  1. The CCR is committed by Resolution 1, May 2003 to working for a process of regularization of people without status;
  2. The CCR has been working for many months on a proposal for regularization;
Therefore be it resolved

That the CCR adopt as policy the Proposal for the regularization of individuals and families without status, as approved by the Working Group on Inland Protection, including the call to:

  1. Provide an opportunity for seasonal agricultural workers to apply for permanent residence, similar to the opportunity provided under the Live-In Caregiver Program;
  2. Introduce an adjustment of status program similar to that introduced in 1972, whereby anyone who was already in Canada by a date (e.g. two years prior) may apply for status.
  3. Eliminate processing fees for humanitarian cases.
Working Group
Inland Protection
Subject
Non-status
Subscribe to Inland Protection