Illegal Border Crossing into Canada - Asylum Seekers

[brihard]

Just a suggestion (then I'll 'shut up') - this isn't a good place to get info on this subject.  It was a good place to discuss it, until today.

Why, what happened today other than someone directly involved in this at the border showing up? I'm as happy to answer questions for him as I am for you. I am not the be all end all expert, but I am on the ground working this, and certainly understand my legal authorities and the various factors in play here. If you think this is a useless place for the layperson to get info, you can only speak for yourself. While I may need to be circumspect and cautious in my input at times, for you to say this thread is no longer a good place for discussion suggests you regarded it as such only so long as you were the only one offering up perspective. I assure you, you are not the only educated person here, nor the only one with an academic understanding of the big picture. Some of us on this board simply happen to also bolster that with real world experience.

You come across as arrogant and insufferable in your insistence on expertise on this. Maybe find a role where you can actually spend some time at the border or with the subject population, or join and become trained and experienced in one of the involved agencies.

There is a finite point beyond which one cannot any longer learn the real world from books. Sometimes to really know something takes doing things and learning from the experience of those you meet whilst doing those things.

 

[jmt18325]

Look, the legal community is also split on this:

http://globalnews.ca/news/3299221/asylum-seekers-us-canada-border-laws/

It's not as clear cut as you're trying to make it out to be.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Just a suggestion (then I'll 'shut up') - this isn't a good place to get info on this subject.  It was a good place to discuss it, until today.

Police officers, border guards, military lawyers, military police, highly educated military officers (commissioned and non) with decades of experience. I'm confident with the level and quality of info here.

Contrary to what you may feel JMT we're actually not here for your entertainment or to give you some sense of debating satisfaction. You've already stated arguing on the internet is a hobby of yours.  If you don't like it here you could always move on instead of lamenting about it and the cliché "last post" stuff. 

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Look, the legal community is also split on this:

http://globalnews.ca/news/3299221/asylum-seekers-us-canada-border-laws/

It's not as clear cut as you're trying to make it out to be.

So??  Some Americans beleave , and will quote for the media, that Mr. Trump is not  their  President.......doesn't make it so.

 

[Haggis]

JMT:  some references for you:

Asylum is defined as the protection granted by a nation to a person who cannot return to their home country for fear of prosecution.

Other than legitimate immigrants who follow the established process, persons arriving at the border fall into two categories under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA):

REFUGEE (IRPA Part II, s. 96): person who, by reason of a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion,
(a) is outside each of their countries of nationality and is unable or, by reason of that fear, unwilling to avail themself of the protection of each of those countries; or
(b) not having a country of nationality, is outside the country of their former habitual residence and is unable or, by reason of that fear, unwilling to return to that country.

PERSON IN NEED OF PROTECTION (IRPA Part II, s. 97(1): person in Canada whose removal to their country or countries of nationality or, if they do not have a country of nationality, their country of former habitual residence, would subject them personally
(a) to a danger, believed on substantial grounds to exist, of torture within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention Against Torture; or
(b) to a risk to their life or to a risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment if
(i) the person is unable or, because of that risk, unwilling to avail themself of the protection of that country,
(ii) the risk would be faced by the person in every part of that country and is not faced generally by other individuals in or from that country,
(iii) the risk is not inherent or incidental to lawful sanctions, unless imposed in disregard of accepted international standards, and
(iv) the risk is not caused by the inability of that country to provide adequate health or medical care.

Most of those crossing will not get to stay. Most do not have sufficient grounds for an asylum claim. Some are showing up already having attempted legal entry, being ruled inadmissible, and having an exclusion order.

Brihard is correct and it's important to understand the onus is on the applicant to prove they require protection as outlined above.  If they have already been deemed inadmissible and nothing in their situation has changed regarding what they may face if repatriated to their country of citizenship, then they will still be inadmissible. 

Some will get to stay-  but very few of the Haitians, absent ministerial intervention. Those with a valid reason to fear for their lives may be accepted.

Note, also, that there is a clear distinction between Refugee and Person in Need of Protection in that a Refugee is fleeing a generally unsafe situation and a Person in Need of Protection is fleeing an unsafe situation that applies to them specifically.

 

[captloadie]

So how will the government deal with this current situation? Having served in Haiti recently, I can see where the regulations posted by Haggis supports Brihard's determination that few of the Haitians crossing the border will meet the definition of refugees or Person's in need of protection. What I can't see is the government loading thousands of these individuals onto chartered aircraft and returning them to Port-au-Prince. Nor can I see gov't putting a whole lot of effort into tracking them down, once word gets out that that is might be the plan and they all scatter in the wind (my understanding is they currently are not being "detained" in any form and have full walking out privileges).

 

[Colin Parkinson]

If they did fly them back, that would cause the flood to become a trickle, there will be some that want a free flight. Letting them go is basically acquiescing to them staying.

 

[brihard]

Therein lies the rub. If the course of events is allowed to play out, over a few years this will all go through Immigraion and Refugee Board hearings, those deemed ineligible will receive orders to exit the country, and then the appeals will start. Once they play out, again there will be orders to leave the country. Some will, some won't. Those who don't will end up with Canada wide immigration warrants and over time as they have encounters with police that cause a CPIC check to be done, they'll slowly trickle in to the detention and removal system.

Some of the people coming in have very valid grounds for asylum... People whose cities back home (e.g., Syria) are literally gone. Others have fallen victim to inaccurate rumors. Some are just mind numbingly stupid and don't have a chance (e.g. some adult American citizens have actually come in thinking they can get asylum here, though it's unclear what they are fleeing). The border situation in Quebec is far from just Haitians at this point. Everyone's got a story, some are truly awful, but most won't cut it.

The big "what if?" Is if the federal minister orders stays on removal processes, and if executive authority is used to arbitrarily grant legal status in Canada to those whose asylum claims don't go through. We are all fully cognizant that a dragged out removal of several thousand Haitians will not look good for the government, and that the timeframe for same could be quite awkward indeed. But that's speculative and in the future.

I have been truly impressed by the CBSA border services officers that I've had the pleasure of working with. These are people who love welcoming those who have been granted permission to come to Canada; who love identifying those at risk in trafficking situations, or assisting those who are fleeing real and awful persecution. I have not in the past given CBSA enough credit as an organization. They have good people doing a tough job.

 

[jmt18325]

The big "what if?" Is if the federal minister orders stays on removal processes, and if executive authority is used to arbitrarily grant legal status in Canada to those whose asylum claims don't go through.

That certainly wouldn't be consistent with any of the messaging around the process from this government. 

 

[Good2Golf]

That certainly wouldn't be consistent with any of the messaging around the process from this government.

Really?  You're going to go with that?  :rofl:

The Government and the PM himself refuse to call their actions crossing the border illegal, but only 'irregular.'  I drove past the tent cities on I-87 a couple days ago, and the accommodations and facilities for them were better turned out than most Canadian Army exercises I've ever been on.  This whole operation is visibly messaging "Welcome!"

You can borrow the batteries from my "surprised face", jmt18325, when this comes to pass -- I won't need them.

G2G

 

 

[jmt18325]

I will be surprised.  If I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

The best solution proposed to date was in a reader's letter to the Montreal Gazette published today:

"Build a wall and make the USA pay for it" ... the reader claims that "there's a precedent to do just that".

:rofl: 

 

[Haggis]

"Build a wall and make the USA pay for it".

I have broached this idea before, but with a twist.  Build it predominantly out of snow and ice, but with sufficient structural framing to maintain it's form and symbolic purpose during the summer, so it becomes a seasonal employment project.

 

[brihard]

Oh, believe me, that joke has been getting a lot of play.

 

[Jarnhamar]

A people wall?

 

[brihard]

It ain't the radicals from the left that I fear having show up at this party... Quite frankly I am what I think is reasonably concerned about some wingnut showing up unhinged one day determined to 'take care of the refugee problem' himself. Most of us don't see it as Anglos, but there's a unique dynamic within franco Quebec's right wing, related to but distinct from (chortle) the conventional white nationalist movement we see in small pockets throughout Canada. While the Haitians mostly speak some French, other nationalities crossing the border do not, and fall into demographics that have gotten a less than sympathetic response from some radical fringe elements. While I don't *expect* an act of violent radicalism at the border, it remains a possibility that I'm attentive to.

 

[Haggis]

The incongruity in this image is stunning.

 

[NavyShooter]

Arrest these clowns, give each of them a family of refugees/migrants/illegal immigrants/claimants/etc to take home and care for, with the promise that their charges will be dropped if they care for the family properly and bring them to the necessary tribunals/hearings/etc.

That would be an amazing act of love on their part...which is the opposite of hate...which is what they're asking for, right?

 

[brihard]

Fewer asylum seekers crossing into Quebec illegally, CBSA says
CBSA says drop in number of refugee claimants started last week but agents still taking situation day by day

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-asylum-seekers-numbers-down-1.4270211

After an unprecedented spike in the number of asylum seekers crossing the border into Quebec illegally in early August, the Canada Border Services Agency says those numbers are now dropping.

Border agents are now handing the claims of 50 to 100 asylum seekers per day.

Compare that to the beginning of the month, when as many as 1,200 people were waiting to be processed at the border crossing in Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, Que.

Before the surge in the number of people crossing into Canada began, agents were handling about a dozen asylum claims daily.

While the number of refugee claimants has been on the decline since the end of last week, the CBSA said it's still taking the situation day by day.

Many of the recent refugee claimants crossing into Quebec are Haitians who have been living in America for years but now face deportation.

In May, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that he would not be extending temporary protection status (TPS) for Haitian nationals past January, when that status is set to expire.

TPS was granted after the 2010 earthquake, but now the Department of Homeland Security considers Haiti to be a safe country.

A slowing of the surge of asylum seekers and more resources allocated to handle the claims also mean that people are spending less time at the makeshift tent city set up at the border while waiting to be processed, said the CBSA.

Last week, Cornwall, Ont., Mayor Leslie O'Shaughnessy announced the tent city pitched outside the Nav Centre to make room for asylum seekers will remain empty until further notice.

He said immigration officials told the city that processing was proceeding more quickly than expected at Quebec crossings.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Meanwhile ...

The federal government is taking precautionary measures in case Canada sees another surge of irregular asylum seekers from the United States, including the possible purchase of winterized trailers and a plan to reach out to groups who may flee the U.S. in the coming months.

Public Services and Procurement Canada issued a tender Thursday* for winterized trailers in Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, Que., where thousands of asylum seekers have crossed into Canada at irregular border crossings in recent months. The tender is seeking accommodations for 200 people on behalf of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), which processes asylum seekers when they cross the border.

The Canadian Armed Forces has set up army encampments in the town capable of accommodating 1,200 people while they wait for the CBSA to process them. Transport Minister Marc Garneau said the tents have heaters but the government is considering trailers for the winter months.

"We are, as a precautionary measure, looking at the possibility of trailers … which have a more robust capability to be able to house people in colder conditions," Mr. Garneau told reporters on Parliament Hill Friday after a meeting with the federal-provincial task force on irregular migration.

The task force, chaired by Mr. Garneau, was formed in August to address the recent increase in asylum seekers from the U.S . Almost 8,000 have irregularly crossed into Quebec – many at Lacolle – since June ...

* - public bidding site notice here (also attached in case link doesn't work):

... THIS LETTER OF INTEREST (LOI) IS NOT A SOLICITATION AND NO CONTRACT WILL RESULT FROM IT.

Intent

Canada has a requirement for letters of interest from interested suppliers with the ability and availability to provide services for the supply and installation of housing units for accommodating 200 people on behalf of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) at St-Bernard-de-Lacolle.

The purpose of this posting is to generate a list of possible suppliers that would be interested in being provided a copy of future solicitation(s) relating to the type of goods or services identified in the requirements described below.

Canada may, at its discretion, decide to only contact or solicit bids from the suppliers that have responded to this LOI.

A.1 Summary Description of Required Goods and Services

The facility will consist of insulated waterproof heated structures providing a good level of comfort in all seasons and meeting the requirements of Part 9 of the 2015 National Building Code. The structures can be mobile in nature or be assembled on-site from prefabricated components. The facilities must primarily accommodate the following:

- Sleeping spaces (bedrooms or dormitories)
- Eating facilities (dining room space for food services [refrigeration area, service area for cold meals and eating area.])
- Living and rest spaces
- Sanitary services (toilets, sinks and showers)
- Spaces for related services (laundry, medical clinic, distribution of supplies)
- Site fit-up (perimeter fencing and lighting).

Please note that the site does not have any storm-drainage, sanitary or drinking-water supply infrastructure. The proposed facilities must therefore be self-sustaining in these areas. Periodic drinking-water supply and disposal-of-wastewater services will not be included in the contract.

A.2 Timeline

The facilities must be operational six weeks after the contract is awarded.

The duration of the services could be for a period of up to nine months after the opening of the facilities, with the possibility of extension periods ...