CCR Resolutions Database

1. Settlement agencies received a memo dated Nov. 2, 2001 indicating that “Enhanced Reliability” clearances on LINC, ISAP, RAP and Host staff will be a contract requirement as of 2002-2003, referring to this as a measure prompted by the events of September 11;
2. The memo is unclear about which staff will be subject to such requirements;
3. The memo implies that CIC is creating a vulnerable computer system after having assured settlement agencies that the system would be secure;
4. The CCR fails to see any connection between September 11 and credit checks on those handling valuables;
5. Agencies are liable for the actions of their staff and volunteers and thus have measures in place to assure their reliability;
6. Preliminary investigation indicates that no other federal department which manages contribution agreements, such as HRDC, Health Canada, CIDA, etc., are implementing similar measures;

1. In April 2001, as part of the larger Integration Initiative supported by the tripartite partners in resettlement, the International Conference on the Reception and Integration of Refugees was held in Sweden. The conference endorsed resettlement and integration as important planks in the international protection system and durable solutions. Among the outcomes of the Conference is a set of principles endorsed by all the participants that provides a platform for further initiatives to take place involving traditional and emerging resettlement countries.
2. One of the elements of the Initiative, the UNHCR Reception and Integration Handbook, will enunciate a framework for supporting people from refugee backgrounds in resettlement countries to rebuild their lives. This process is underway and continues to involve a Task Force made up of governmental and NGO representatives from many of the traditional and emerging resettlement countries, including Canada.
3. Other outcomes have begun in less structured ways such as through informal sharing of information, site visits and exchange of material resources. In Canada, these early activities include the facilitation of site visits and conference participation by representatives from Chile, one of the emerging resettlement countries in southern South America and the resulting commitments to ongoing relationships between Canadian NGOs and the Chilean resettlement partners.
4. As UNHCR does not inherently have the expertise in reception and integration issues, and as the financing of a focal point for the Integration Initiative concludes as of December 2001, the process for facilitating the continuation of the integration initiative, including the post-ICRIRR process, is vulnerable.
5. Canada took a lead role in the planning process leading up to the ICRIRR conference and has endorsed the overall Integration Initiative including becoming a member of the Reference Group for the Integration Initiative and supporting governmental participation in the Task Force responsible for developing the Reception and Integration Handbook. In recognition of this leadership role, UNHCR requested the Government of Canada to Chair the Reference Group and provide leadership in facilitating the post ICRIRR process. To date Canada has not responded to this request.
6. The ICRIRR Principles include commitment to tripartite processes and the participation of relevant partners concerned with the resettlement and integration of refugees. The UNHCR Working Group on Resettlement, currently a bilateral forum, through the Reference Group for the Integration Initiative, is tasked with providing follow-up to the ICRIRR process. Furthermore, the Working Group on Resettlement is also the principal body of UNHCR and its resettlement partners for dialogue on ongoing broader refugee resettlement policies and initiatives.
7. During the Annual Tripartite Consultations on Resettlement in Geneva (June 2001), participants expressed interest in including NGO representation on the UNHCR Working Group on Resettlement. Although there is receptivity to NGO presence at the Working Group this has yet to be defined and agreed upon by the existing UNHCR and governmental membership.
8. The Canadian Council for Refugees was actively engaged in the preparation for and participation in the ICRIRR Conference and endorsed the principles and the resolutions evolving from the Conference. Furthermore, the CCR is also considering how it may participate more actively in international fora.

1. The CCR has become increasingly involved in international activities and consultations with respect to refugee protection, resettlement and integration;
2. International forums and discussions impact Canada’s own policies and programs within the global context;

The CCR reaffirms Resolution 3 from November 1992 and Resolution16 from December 2000,

1. Immigrant serving agencies require operational funds to deliver services to newcomers as per the terms of contribution agreements of CIC;
2. There has been an ongoing problem with service provider organizations having insufficient cashflow to deliver continuous services to newcomers due to delays in the approval of new contribution agreements;

1. National Detention Standards remain at a draft stage but function as de facto guidelines;
2. It is acknowledged that there are no management oversight boards for detention facilities within the CIC structure and no satisfactory complaint mechanisms;

1. The CCR in June 1994 called on CIC to fund agencies at levels to provide for adequate working conditions;
2. Staff working in CIC funded programs, including in provinces that have signed agreements, are skilled professionals;
3. There is wide variation in funding levels for salaries, none of which adequately compensate staff for the work which they are doing;
4. Many workers have no benefits, no pension plans, no prep time for teachers and in general sub-standard working conditions;
5. Some contracts do not even allow for sick days;

1. The CCR opposes interdiction and has affirmed in Resolution 13 of May 93 and in the report of a task force published in May 1998 and entitled Interdicting Refugees its commitment to the right to seek asylum in Canada, but notes that the practice of interdiction continues;
2. The International Air Transport Association Control Authority Working Group Code of Conduct for Immigration Liaison Officers of October 1998 provides that Liaison Officers should direct requests for asylum to the office of the UNHCR or to the appropriate diplomatic mission (paragraph 2.3);
3. Interception of refugee claimants en route to Canada is normally effected by airline staff or subcontracted security firms who are not subject to the code of conduct and not by governmental Liaison Officers;

1. Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) has expressed; a desire for a coordinated continuum in the refugee sponsorship process;
2. CIC has issued a tender for proposal for an In-Canada Service Provider (ISP), the latest with a closing date of May 29, 2001;
3. The ISP tender should have been posted for the public after budget was secured;
4. The RSTP was extended to June 30, 2001 to facilitate transition to the ISP;
5. There is another indefinite delay in the July 1, 2001 starting date for the ISP;
6. There is a significant increase in new Sponsorship Agreement Holders (SAH) to whom RSTP/ISP would be indispensable in order for them to carry out their work effectively;
7. The training and resources developed by the RSTP have enhanced SAHs effectiveness in refugee sponsorship;
8. There will be a significant gap with the dissolution of the RSTP on June 30, 2001, which will result in the loss of infrastructure and knowledgeable staff;

1. Minister’s Permits have been issued for compassionate and humanitarian reasons to allow for urgent admission of individuals and families in dire circumstances;
2. Minister’s Permits have been issued to persons in Canada who are inadmissible on medical grounds;
3. The recipients of Minister’s Permits are not eligible for benefits available to resettled refugees and persons with permanent resident status (such as travel loans and health care);

1. The UNHCR exclusion clause guidelines of December 1996 provide that:
   a) in principle, the applicability of the exclusion clauses should be considered only after the adjudicator is satisfied that the individual fulfils the criteria for refugee status (guidelines 9).
   b) an assessment of a claim requires that the nature of the crime and the claimant’s role in it be weighed against the gravity of the persecution feared (guideline 9).
   c) the exclusion clauses need to be interpreted restrictively (guideline 8);
2. The Federal Court has said that:
   a) it is not legally necessary to decide inclusion before exclusion, but it is desirable to do so.
   b) the refugee definition does not require that the gravity of the crime be balanced against the gravity of the persecution feared.
   c) the Board must be extremely cautious in its application of the exclusion clauses, but also that the standard of proof is less than the balance of probabilities;
3. The Immigration Act gives the Chairperson of the Immigration and Refugee Board power to issue guidelines to the Board;

1. Citizenship and Immigration Canada maintains a list of countries to which Canada does not generally deport individuals from those countries;
2. A significant number of people from those countries, who are subject to deportation, have now been in Canada for many years and have no avenue to resolve their situation;
3. Living in this limbo situation causes great hardship and suffering, including long term separation from immediate family members;
4. It is very difficult for persons in this situation to be accepted for permanent residence through the Humanitarian and Compassionate stream;
5. This situation will continue to prevail after the implementation of the new Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Bill C-11);

1. CCR brings together NGOs active and involved in the 4 Metropolis Centres of Excellence (Vancouver, Prairies, Toronto, Montreal and soon the Atlantic);
2. Metropolis (Canada) is proposing a national research program aimed at developing immigration policies and programs for the coming 6 years;
3. The proposed research priorities question the role of community organizations serving refugees and immigrants and will affect the areas of activity of NGOs;
4. Metropolis relies on the support and participation of NGOs in the processes; of consultation, adoption and implementation of a national research program;
5. The current Metropolis proposal deals mainly with immigration as an economic and competitive issue  and gives undue priority to public security and criminality aspects of immigration;
6. The Metropolis proposal marginalizes the role and responsibility of the  host society in settling newcomers and fails to take into account the reception and settlement of refugees;

The Canadian Red Cross is about to sign a Detention Monitoring Agreement to monitor CIC detention facilities;

1. By resolution passed in 1993 the formation of a joint committee of private sponsorship representatives and CIC personnel for the purpose of improving communications was mandated;
2. This committee as originally mandated has successfully negotiated the current Sponsorship Agreement and is now engaged in the drafting of a new version of the agreement, as well as having been involved in working at a number of other on-going issues related to the private sponsorship of refugees;
3. CIC personnel present at these meetings have been inconsistent in number and in the level of decision-making power, resulting in a lack of policy-making ability as well as results-oriented discussion;
4. The SAH representatives have contributed far beyond a normal volunteer capacity in the hope of achieving results in the area of policy making;

delays cause anxiety and instability for refugees and their families;

1. In the past when the immigration system has undergone a substantial change the government has allowed those caught up in the older system to receive landing under relaxed criteria;
2. There are a substantial number of protection claimants caught up at various stages in the present immigration system;
3. The Canadian Government is proposing a complete overhaul of the present system through Bill C-11;
4. It is undesirable to burden the new immigration system with a substantial caseload from the old system;

1. There have been a series of allegations of racial bias and institutional racism concerning members of the IRB and its personnel;
2. There have been no serious studies of these allegations of racial bias;

1. In resolution 9 of November 1996, the CCR committed itself to exposing atrocities by the Sudanese government upon the people of southern Sudan;
2. Anglican members of their refugee network have worked with Sudanese in Canada to sponsor refugees from Sudan;
3. The war in Sudan, which is in part responsible for the displacement of millions of people, has been fuelled by oil revenues from the expanding operation in which Talisman Energy is a major partner;
4. The national pension fund of the Anglican Church of Canada has invested heavily in the Talisman shares;

1. Citizenship and Immigration Canada does not consistently provide refugee claimants with interpreters at eligibility interviews;
2. The notes which are produced by Citizenship and Immigration Canada at eligibility interviews are given great weight at hearings before the Convention Refugee Determination Division;
3. The lack of interpretation at an eligibility interview can and does create confusion and misunderstanding between refugee claimants and Citizenship and Immigration Canada officials;

1. CIC has been using P&I, a private company, to remove African nationals from Canada to Africa;
2. The deportees have been forcibly detained and unlawfully confined by a private company;

1. HIV positive persons are not a threat to public health or safety;
2. Instituting mandatory HIV testing for all prospective immigrants is discriminatory since this would be the only group for whom mandatory testing is imposed;
3. Testing could significantly harm people identified as being HIV positive who live in countries with coercive laws or practice;

on November 29, 2000, the Sponsorship Agreement Holder (SAH)representatives in attendance at the SAH Forum voted on and passed with an overwhelming majority three resolutions expressing their support for:

1. formally situating the SAH network within CCR, 2. submitting an SAH application for the In-Canada Service-Provider contract,
2. submitting this proposal under the umbrella of CCR;

1. There are minor orphans of war or civil strife or in other refugee-like situations whose future is limited without resettlement;
2. Current procedures for the sponsorship of orphaned minors are inadequate;

1. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in its report invited Canada to draw on the resources of the OAS human rights system;
2. Training for IRB members in international human rights law is not given by a competent arms-length human rights body;