Former immigration minister [Miller] rejected officials’ advice to shelve Sudan humanitarian program

2025/11/04 Leave a comment

Of note, classic case of balancing general objectives with the specific:

Immigration officials advised shelving a special humanitarian program, designed to help Sudanese Canadians bring family members here to escape civil war in the African country, over concerns that plans to reduce immigration could be undermined, sources say.

The officials argued that bringing in Sudanese could affect the government’s immigration levels plan: annual targets that the government sets for the number of permanent and temporary residents it plans to admit.

But former immigration minister Marc Miller, two sources say, last year rejected that argument as he thought Canada should help family members of Canadians caught up in what has been described as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. He pressed ahead with establishing a pathway to permanent residence for those with direct family ties to Sudanese Canadians, although processing delays have left thousands who applied stranded. Mr. Miller declined to comment. …

Source: Former immigration minister rejected officials’ advice to shelve Sudan humanitarian program

Filed under Immigration, Refugees Tagged with ,

The Trump administration is turning back the clock on refugee protections 

2025/11/01 Leave a comment

Stating the obvious:

…In the decades since, both Canada and the United States have emerged as leaders in refugee protection, most significantly through resettlement programs with global reach. Canada’s refugee determination system is often hailed as the “gold standard.” Yet we are in a time of lessening access to claims protection, reductions in Canada’s private refugee-sponsorship program, and a hardening of the border as a barrier via the expansion of the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement. These moves, alongside the swift changes in the United States, will have widespread and devastating impacts on people who desperately need protection.

The Trump administration’s suggestions for a privileged form of asylum for white and politically aligned refugees is not new – it is a throwback, and one that undermines decades of progress. Governments need to call the Trump administration to task for the gross politicization and racialization of international refugee protection. And they need to do so by addressing their own hypocrisy as well. 

Laura Madokoro is an associate professor of history at Carleton University. Shauna Labman is the executive director of the Global College at the University of Winnipeg.

Source: The Trump administration is turning back the clock on refugee protections

Filed under Refugees, Trump administration Tagged with ,

Trump caps refugee admissions at record low – with most to be white South Africans

2025/10/31 Leave a comment

Sick:

The Trump administration will limit the number of refugees admitted to the US to 7,500 over the next year, and give priority to white South Africans.

The move, announced in a notice published on Thursday, marks a dramatic cut from the previous limit of 125,000 set by former President Joe Biden and will bring the cap to a record low.

No reason was given for the cut, but the notice said it was “justified by humanitarian concerns or is otherwise in the national interest”.

In January, Trump signed an executive order suspending the US Refugee Admissions Programme, or USRAP, which he said would allow US authorities to prioritise national security and public safety.

The previous lowest refugee admissions cap was set by the first Trump administration in 2020, when it allocated 15,000 spots for fiscal year 2021.

The notice posted to the website of the Federal Register said the 7,500 admissions would “primarily” be allocated to Afrikaner South Africans and “other victims of illegal or unjust discrimination in their respective homelands”.

In February, the US president announced the suspension of critical aid to South Africa and offered to allow members of the Afrikaner community – who are mostly white descendants of early Dutch and French settlers – to settle in the US as refugees….

Source: Trump caps refugee admissions at record low – with most to be white South Africans

Filed under Immigration, Refugees, Trump administration Tagged with

ICYMI – Globe editorial: Ottawa narrows the private path for settling refugees

2025/10/15 Leave a comment

One of the more successful programs:

…However, the sidelining of this remarkable program is unfortunate, as privately sponsored refugees have better outcomes than those assisted by the government. Not only is it initially cheaper for the government, but a study tracking the outcomes of Syrian refugees showed that privately sponsored ones were more likely to be employed and less likely to be on government assistance. Privately sponsored refugees also have higher incomes. A 2024 Senate report recommended boosting the program. 

Yes, Canada needs to get better control of its immigration system, but let’s not lose track of our rich tradition of helping refugees. Their entry doesn’t always need to be directly managed by government – grassroots groups can help, and their strong interest shows these refugees have support to integrate here. 

While it’s true that Canada can’t help all people in need during this time of increased global displacement, surely we can maintain our commitments to help refugees. The privately sponsored program remains one of the best ways to do it. 

Source: Ottawa narrows the private path for settling refugees

Filed under Immigration, Refugees Tagged with ,

Sharp rise in Americans applying for refugee status in Canada, data shows

2025/08/25 Leave a comment

Header misleading. An increase yes of about 20 percent but still small numbers, only about .05 percent:

More Americans applied for refugee status in Canada in the first half of 2025 than in all of 2024, and more than in any full year since 2019, according to data published on Thursday by Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Board.

Their share of total refugee claims – 245 of about 55,000 – is small and Canada’s acceptance of U.S. refugee claims has historically been low. Asylum-seekers from other countries crossing the land border from the U.S. are sent back under a bilateral agreement with the reasoning that they should apply for asylum in the first “safe” country they arrived in.

Last year 204 people filed refugee claims in Canada with the United States as their country of alleged persecution. Claims from the U.S. also rose during the first Trump administration.
The data does not say why the claims were made. Eight lawyers told Reuters they are hearing from more trans Americans wanting to leave. Reuters spoke with a trans woman from Arizona who came to Canada in April to file a claim, and to a woman who came to file a claim on behalf of her young trans daughter…

Source: Sharp rise in Americans applying for refugee status in Canada, data shows

Filed under Refugees Tagged with ,

Border bill would leave dissidents who visited Canada in the past at risk: experts

2025/08/20 Leave a comment

Valid concern but how to have an exception from the general rule with a definition and process that separates significant dissidents from some who make claim but have less legitimate fears:

Dissidents, human-rights activists and journalists being persecuted by foreign regimes could find themselves unable to get asylum hearings in Canada under planned immigration changes, refugee experts warn. 

They are calling on the federal government to create an exception in Bill C-2, the Strong Borders bill, so dissidents can find safe haven here. 

As it is currently worded, the bill would exclude dissidents and others from hearings at the Immigration and Refugee Board if they came to Canada more than a year before their claim.

Many – including political opponents of authoritarian regimes – may have visited Canada to attend meetings, speak at summits or give lectures, the experts warn. 

Bill C-2, which is going through its parliamentary stages, aims to tighten up immigration rules and is likely to cut the total number of asylum claims. It would put people who have been in Canada for more than a year on a fast track to deportation. 

The bill specifies that the one-year period “begins on the day after the day of their first entry.” 

Lawyers said a “first entry” would include any previous visit to Canada, including a holiday here. 

“Unlike the U.S. approach, where the one-year rule generally applies based on the most recent entry and includes exceptions, the Canadian version is broader and more rigid,” immigration lawyer Warda Shazadi Meighen of Toronto law firm Landings LLP said in an e-mail.

“This has troubling implications. It would apply to individuals who came to Canada years ago for reasons entirely unrelated to their current need for protection – as children on holiday, students, guest speakers or attendees at international conferences. 

“These are often the same people – foreign dissidents, human rights advocates, journalists and LGBTQ+ individuals – who later flee genuine and escalating persecution from authoritarian regimes. Their prior, often innocent, engagement with Canada could now preclude them from seeking asylum here.”

Ms. Shazadi Meighen urged the government to create “a clear carve-out for dissidents and others fleeing political violence or state persecution, or at minimum a discretionary mechanism with procedural safeguards for those who fall outside the one-year window due to past presence but now face genuine risk.” 

Gauri Sreenivasan, co-executive director of the Canadian Council for Refugees, called the one-year bar being proposed in Bill C-2 “a dangerous step that actually undermines safety for many in Canada.”

“For example, those that travelled to Canada as children, or someone that came to Canada previously as a renowned journalist, academic or human-rights defender to share their expertise and is later under threat in their country for this very reason could be arbitrarily denied access to safety due to their earlier visit; it defies logic,” she said. “There should be no time limit on the right to seek protection in or at our borders.”

Fen Osler Hampson, president of the World Refugee and Migration Council, said the wording of the bill’s clauses on asylum could have far-reaching, unintended consequences.

“In legislative drafting, every word and comma counts and the government should scrutinize every word, sentence and paragraph in new legislation carefully, not just in terms of their intended consequence and professed objectives, but also their potentially unintended consequences, which, in this particular instance, are profound and unintentionally discriminatory,” Mr. Osler Hampson, who is also professor of international affairs at Carleton University in Ottawa, said in an e-mail. 

Source: Border bill would leave dissidents who visited Canada in the past at risk: experts

Filed under Immigration, Refugees Tagged with , , , , ,

How do Canadian officials detect plagiarized refugee claims?

2025/08/08 Leave a comment

Reasonable use of AI IMO:

A failed refugee claimant came to Amandeep Singh in May for help after he was refused because his claim was “nearly word for word” identical to others before the refugee board.

While the Edmonton-based immigration consultant had heard for a long time that some claimants and their counsel have plagiarized claims to game the system, what struck him was what tool the refugee board and immigration officials use to flag these cases, which he says seems to have happened more often.

“I wouldn’t say this (plagiarism) is something new,” said Singh, who did not take on that client because he didn’t believe the man had a case. “It shows to me that officials are actually using artificial intelligence, so it is easier for them to look at multiple cases at the same time to see if the information in a claim matches with other asylum applications.”

While the refugee board denies the use of AI in its claim processing, the Immigration Department and the border agency — bodies that determine if a foreign national is eligible to seek asylum in Canada and which can intervene in refugee hearings — are less clear on how they identify these cases. Generally, officials deem similar claims as a potential indicator of fraud.

In the case that Singh reviewed with personal information redacted, the refugee board adjudicator drew comparisons between the man’s claim and five others.

“I am a follower of the Sikh religion, and my family and I are devout Sikhs … 1became (sic) the member of Khalistan movement (aiming for a peaceful creation of an independent state for Sikh people),” according to the refugee refusal decision, which set out a side-by-side table highlighting each similar paragraph in those claims. The parentheses are from the claim, which includes grammatical errors, as cited in the decision.

“The primary objective for joining movement was to establish a new nation for the Sikh community, providing them the freedom to practice their religious activities and ensuring equal rights for all.”

Apart from the different date noting when the claimant joined the movement, the whole paragraph, including the typo “1,” was the same as the narrative cited by the refugee protection tribunal. The claims also referred to visits by Indian authorities to the family homes to look for the claimant and for alleged links to Pakistan.

The person told the tribunal that he did not know why others’ narratives were similar to his word for word, but did explain that what happened to him could have happened to all Sikhs given the circumstances. The refugee judge, however, concluded that’s not reasonable.

Sean Rehaag, director of Refugee Law Laboratory at Osgoode Hall Law School, said there are anti-plagiarism tools that universities have used for a long time to find similar bits of text, as well as ways for the refugee board to identify similar claims without using high-tech.

For instance, said Rehaag, a decision-maker may encounter two or more similar claims, and refer to the board administration to look into it further, examining other files from the same country by the same representative. Or decision-makers may talk with one another about a particular type of case, or someone triaging cases discovers a pattern and flags it internally.

Rehaag said the information could also come from immigration and border agency officials, who he said probably have program integrity tools that would allow them to identify suspicious patterns. In those circumstances, he said, officials would then intervene in the refugee proceedings based on integrity concerns.

The Immigration and Refugee Board told the Star that it does not use artificial intelligence at any stage of processing or deciding claims.

“While claims from the same country or region may share common elements, credibility or integrity issues could be raised if review of the files identified substantially similar claimants’ narratives about the specific circumstances of their claim,” the board said in an email.

Where similarities are identified in the process, it said claimants are required to provide an explanation. If the claimant is found to have provided false or misleading evidence, it could lead to a rejection….

Source: How do Canadian officials detect plagiarized refugee claims?

Filed under Immigration, Refugees Tagged with , ,

Doug Ford and other premiers want provincial work permits for refugee claimants. It may not solve anything

2025/07/28 Leave a comment

Nothing burger given quick processing of 45 days?

With refugee claimants now getting work permits fairly quickly and housing being less of a pain point, why do Canada’s premiers want to seize power from Ottawa to issue work permits?

This week, the provincial leaders emerged from the premiers’ meeting united in seeking the powers under the Constitution to issue work authorization to asylum seekers, which is currently under the federal government’s jurisdiction.

The reason behind the move, Premier Doug Ford said Wednesday, is that a lot of asylum seekers living in hotels would like to work and be self-sufficient, but can’t because it’s taking too long for Ottawa to process their work permits.

While any initiative that would help claimants to get on their feet and start working as quickly as possible is positive, Toronto refugee lawyer Adam Sadinsky isn’t sure if that push is based on “outdated information.” (The Immigration Department’s website shows work permit application processing for non-refugees currently takes 181 days.)

“It was an issue a couple of years ago,” said Sadinsky, whose clients in Canada generally now receive their work permits in about six weeks. “In my practice, I haven’t seen that it is really a significant issue anymore.”

Section 95 of the Constitution Act outlines the concurrent jurisdiction of the Canadian Parliament and provincial legislatures including immigration, education and health care. It states that both levels of government can make laws in these areas, but in a conflict, federal laws prevail. 

In fact, the two levels of governments have already shared jurisdiction in some areas of immigration. The provincial nominee immigration programs, for example, allow provinces to select prospective permanent residents for Ottawa’s stamp of approval.

Currently, the only provincial-based work permits are those related to the provincial nominee program, where the province can approve the work authorization of a selected candidate, who will ultimately get the permit from the federal government.

“The provinces and the feds have worked together,” said Toronto immigration lawyer Rick Lamanna on behalf of the Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association. 

But could it be just a bluff from the premiers?

“We’ll know more if or when you start to see things coming out, whether it’s from Ontario or Alberta or other provinces, putting more meat on those bones,” Lamanna said. 

“When you start to see logistical plans, if they start opening up stakeholder consultations, if they make announcements like expansion of Service Ontario to facilitate the issuance of these permits, I think that’s when we’ll know.” 

In a statement to the Star, the Immigration Department said claimants must submit a completed application, including a medical exam, and are determined to be eligible to seek protection before they are issued a work permit. On average, it now takes 45 days to process.

Officials have also found more sustainable and cost-effective solutions such as the new refugee reception centre in Peel to house and support asylum seekers….

Source: Doug Ford and other premiers want provincial work permits for refugee claimants. It may not solve anything

Filed under Immigration, Refugees Tagged with , , ,

ICYMI – Chris Selley: Canada’s refugee system — and the world’s — is overdue for an overhaul

2025/07/22 Leave a comment

About 70 percent of refugees already live close to their country of origin but makes sense for Canada to support seeking refuge in neighbouring countries:

…The simple fact is, Canada is not equipped to handle as many refugee claims as we currently accept. If we were, there wouldn’t be African migrants sleeping on Toronto sidewalks. There wouldn’t have been 281,000 pending asylum cases as of March 31.

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Liberal government is certainly aware of the issue. Bill C-2 proposes a one-year deadline after arriving in Canada for claiming asylum — so people with expired or revoked visas couldn’t apply, for example — and to eliminate a loophole in the Safe Third Country Agreement that allows illegal border-crossers who evade capture for two weeks to apply for asylum nevertheless.

Both are entirely reasonable. But the current issue of The Economist, cover headline “Scrap the refugee system,” suggests the sort of wholesale changes to the global refugee system that I have been arguing for forever. It’s interesting not so much as a piece of journalism as it is to know that liberal (and Liberal) policymakers very much tend to read The Economist.

“About 123 million people have been displaced by conflict, disaster or persecution. … All these people have a right to seek safety,” the magazine’s editorial observes. “But ‘safety’ does not mean access to a rich country’s labour market. Indeed, resettlement in rich countries will never be more than a tiny part of the solution.”

The goal, the august organ argues, should be for refugees to receive asylum closer to home — ideally in culturally and linguistically similar countries whose population will tend to be more sympathetic. For the money that rich countries spend processing everyone who manages to make it to their shores — who are generally by definition not the world’s most imperilled or downtrodden, else they wouldn’t be able to get here — they could help vastly more people to safety, even if not First World prosperity. (The latter was never the goal of the current system.)

This is an idea that would require multilateral co-operation to achieve full bloom, of course. But many First World countries are far more hostile to asylum-seekers, if not immigrants in general, than Canada is. If Canada significantly restricted refugee claims made on Canadian soil, and instead refocused its efforts on helping people find refuge closer to home, it would set a useful example — not least because we have been so welcoming, to a fault, in the past.

Source: Chris Selley: Canada’s refugee system — and the world’s — is overdue for an overhaul

Filed under Refugees Tagged with

Border bill would create ‘in limbo’ foreign residents, refugee groups say 

2025/07/12 Leave a comment

Usual critique by advocates, with no analysis of numbers likely to be affected or recognition of previous abuses:

A federal crackdown on asylum claims would create a new “in limbo” class of foreign residents who couldn’t be returned home but who would be barred from asylum hearings and unable to work in Canada, refugee groups say.

They are warning government officials that the Strong Borders Act, which was introduced before MPs went on summer break, would lead to people living without status in Canada if their home countries are deemed too dangerous for them to be returned to.

The legislation, also known as Bill C-2, would tighten up Canada’s immigration and asylum system, barring people who arrived in Canada more than a year ago from having an asylum claim heard by the independent Immigration and Refugee Board. Applicants to the IRB can qualify for work permits and health coverage while they wait for assessments. 

The restriction would apply to people who entered the country after June 24, 2020, even if they have since left and returned.

Bill C-2 would also prevent people who crossed the U.S. border illegally from claiming asylum if they have been in Canada for at least 14 days, which is currently permitted under a provision of the Safe Third Country Agreement with the United States….

Source: Border bill would create ‘in limbo’ foreign residents, refugee groups say

Filed under Immigration, Refugees Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →