 |
home | our services | contact info | f a q | email | Useful Links | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Appeal bid fails, lawsuits possible
ALLAN THOMPSON In a ruling Friday, Mr. Justice Marshall Rothstein of the Federal Court, Appeal Division, put an end to the immigration department's attempt to appeal a Feb. 21 decision by Mr. Justice Michael Kelen. In a decision that could effect tens of thousands of applicants, Kelen ordered the department to go back and apply old rules to the cases of 102 applicants who claimed they were entitled to be processed under the criteria in place at the time they submitted their applications. When the department overhauled the point system used to select Canada's skilled worker immigrants last year, bureaucrats decided to apply the rules retroactively, even though that would result in more than 100,000 backlogged applications being bumped over into the new system. Many applicants have complained that while they would have gained entry under the old system, they will be disqualified by the new criteria. In the February decision, the judge ruled that even though the immigration department extended the deadline for applying the new rules for skilled workers until March 31, it hadn't done enough to try to plow through the backlog of applications. Lawyers for some of the tens of thousands of applicants with files in the system have already launched class-action suits, in an attempt to force the government to apply the old rules, or pay millions of dollars in damages to clients denied the chance to start a new life in Canada. Since the end of March, a number of court proceedings involving more than 5,000 people have been launched based on grounds similar to the February decision.
MINISTER ADJUSTS SKILLED WORKER PASSMARK AND PROPOSES CHANGES FOR ECONOMIC CLASS IMMIGRATION APPLICANTS AFFECTED BY IRPA TRANSITIONAL RULES OTTAWA, September 18, 2003 -- The Honourable Denis Coderre, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada, today announced an important decision and recommendation pertaining to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). The Minister announced an adjustment to the pass mark for federal skilled worker applicants. Also, today he proposed new measures for assessing certain economic class applicants who applied under the former Immigration Act but were affected by transitional measures following implementation of IRPA on June 28, 2002. The Minister's move to adjust the pass mark is a response to Canada's need for skilled workers. Effective immediately, all new skilled worker applicants and those currently in the system who have not yet received a selection decision, will be assessed with a pass mark of 67. (Since the implementation of IRPA and until today, the pass mark was 75.) "An important objective of IRPA was to create a system that is flexible," said the Minister. "Today's changes to IRPA reflect this flexibility and our ongoing commitment to listen to the views of all stakeholders. We are responding to current circumstances in a way that continues to encourage skilled immigration within the confines of existing resources and a balanced plan." Additionally, the Minister is proposing to amend the IRP transition regulations to allow for all skilled worker and business immigration applicants who applied before January 01, 2002 to be assessed under the selection criteria of the former Immigration Act. Applicants who do not qualify under the former Act would then be assessed under the current IRPA. "The government's clear intention has always been to treat applicants fairly," explained the Minister. "That is why we introduced and then extended transition measures. The court has suggested that more is required of the government. I have listened to that message. That is why I am proposing these changes today." The Minister plans to consult his Cabinet colleagues on the proposed regulatory amendments at the first available opportunity. The new pass mark takes effect immediately. -30- For more information (media only):
Backgrounder Selecting Skilled Worker and Business Immigrants The inventory of skilled worker cases in process could not be cleared before the coming into force of IRPA. Therefore, in fairness, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) took several steps which included:
Some skilled worker and business applicants felt that the transition rules were not fair and took the department to Court. In February 2003, the Federal Court ordered that the applications of those involved in the lawsuit who had applied before January 1, 2002 be assessed under the former Act before March 31, 2003. CIC complied with that order. For those who submitted their applications after January 1, 2002, the judge felt that they had been aware at the time they filed their applications that they would be processed under IRPA and that there was therefore no unfairness. Following the Courts decision, many other people felt that their applications should also be reviewed. In June 2003, a Federal Court judge imposed an injunction on CIC, preventing the department from finally refusing any application which was filed prior to January 1, 2002. This injunction also requires the department to notify all applicants that could potentially be involved in a class action. CIC is in the process of complying with this injunction. The courts have determined that, while they are legal, the transition provisions between the Immigration Act and IRPA are not as fair to applicants who applied before January 1, 2002 as the government had believed. The government has listened to that message. For that reason, Minister Denis Coderre is proposing to amend the transition regulations to allow economic class applicants (skilled workers and business immigrants) who filed their applications for permanent residence before January 1, 2002 to be assessed under the former Immigration Act (and then under IRPA if refused under the former Act). The Minister plans to consult his Cabinet colleagues on these proposed regulatory amendments at the first available opportunity. These proposed amendments would meet the applicants' request to be processed under the selection criteria in place at the time they filed their applications and also give them the benefit of an assessment under IRPA. CIC also proposes to offer the same processing to:
Applicants in these last two groups will be required to advise CIC of their desire to be processed before January 01, 2005. CIC does not propose to amend the regulations to allow applicants who applied to immigrate to Canada between January 1, 2002 and the coming into force of IRPA. These applicants were aware, at the time they filed their applications, that they would be processed under IRPA. The courts have not disagreed with the department's interpretation of the transition rules as they apply to this group.
Backgrounder Pass Mark for Skilled Workers The Minister set the Federal Skilled Worker pass mark at 75 points when the new selection system came into effect on June 28, 2002. On September 18, 2003, the Minister amended the pass mark for new skilled worker applicants to 67. The pass mark for skilled worker applicants currently in the system who have not yet received a selection decision will be also be 67. A pass mark at that level will allow the Canadian economy to benefit from skilled immigrants and meet immigration goals. Regulation 76 (2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations states that:
Examples of who would qualify with a pass mark of 67:
Canadian immigration news coverage in the Media!!!! Hope for would-be immigrants Applications valid until class-action suit settled, federal court judge rules By MARINA JIMENEZ Ottawa cannot bar 300,000 prospective immigrants from Canada using new, strict rules imposed after they applied to come to the country, a federal court judge has ruled. The judgment, released yesterday in the Federal Court of Canada, says the government cannot reject these applications until a class-action lawsuit challenging the new selection criteria has been decided by the courts. The decision gives new hope to 300,000 skilled workers, entrepreneurs and their families who want to immigrate to Canada and have already waited years for their applications to be processed. A class-action suit seeking $400-million in damages has been launched on their behalf, arguing that the retroactive application of the new immigration law is unfair. They applied under guidelines in use before January 2002, and are considered backlog cases. "This is a big victory and an important decision," said Ron Foerster, who is arguing the class-action lawsuit with Toronto immigration lawyers Dan Miller and Lorne Waldman. Mr. Waldman added: "This is unprecedented. The government has never been told not to process applications on this large scale. Now these people still have a chance to immigrate to Canada." Many backlog applicants would qualify under the old rules, which stressed education, age, language ability and Canada's labour market needs. The new rules favour those with firm job offers and are so strict that even a single person with fluent English and a PhD would fail to qualify. A blue-collar worker with a technical diploma married to someone with a university degree would not be accepted either. Late Friday, a spokeswoman for Citizenship and Immigration Canada said it would comply with the order. "We will take a careful look at the order and evaluate its implications," Susan Scarlett said. "For those people that don't meet the new criteria, we will hold off refusing them until the lawsuit is resolved." She added that the department will still be able to welcome skilled immigrants and business people to Canada. "We can assess and approve people who meet the new criteria," she said. "These transition measures were designed to strike a balance." Immigration lawyers believe the new rules were implemented to get rid of an embarrassing backlog of overseas applicants. Some people had waited as long as five years for an interview with Canadian officials to obtain a visa. "The government came up with retroactivity rules to get rid of the backlog with a minimum of fuss because they cannot handle the workload," said Ben Trister, past president of the Canadian Bar Association's immigration section. "Now the judge's decision has levelled the playing field. It may encourage the parties to come together and reach a common-sense decision and avoid litigation." The ruling orders the government to provide written notice to the hundreds of thousands of people in the backlog. The majority are from India and China, but they come from dozens of different countries. The government must also advise applicants about the class-action lawsuit and the damages lawyers are seeking on their behalf. "The government will have to sit on these files for potentially years because the courts will take years to decide the case," predicted Mr. Waldman. The new rules were part of the government's new Immigration Act, which became law in June 2002. The decision to apply the new rules retroactively was announced six months earlier. Initially, the government believed only 30,000 people were in the backlog. Some Liberal MPs were angry that the changes would disqualify skilled tradespeople without firm job offers from immigrating to Canada. Michael Friscolanti
The Citizenship and Immigration department is bracing for a flood
of multi-million dollar lawsuits after a panel of judges upheld a
controversial ruling that said federal bureaucrats misled
Parliament about severe backlogs in the immigration system.
The decision, handed down on Thursday by the Federal Court of Appeal, alters the fate of more than 100,000 prospective immigrants, who applied for visas under old entry rules but were not assessed before tougher standards were adopted last year. The ruling, which could ultimately cost the government millions of dollars in compensation, is just the latest development in a politically charged case already rife with accusations of lies and deception. That rhetoric reached a fever pitch this year, when the original judge took the unprecedented step of clarifying his decision after Denis Coderre, the Citizenship and Immigration Minister, insisted it was only a draft. A spokeswoman for the department said last night the government is still reviewing Thursday's ruling, but lawyers who represent the affected immigrants said the judgment leaves the Minister with only two choices: He can either refund everyone's processing fees or assess the 104,000 applicants under the old rules. If neither happens, they say, the government could spend years -- and millions of dollars -- fighting each claim in court. "The government is reaping the consequences of a very ill-conceived policy," said Lorne Waldman, a Toronto immigration lawyer who argued against the government's appeal. "The government pulled the rug out from under them without warning -- after they collected their money." The roots of Mr. Coderre's looming dilemma can be traced back to December, 2001, when the government announced its new Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which included a new points system to assess skilled workers applying for entry into Canada. It emphasizes such assets as postgraduate education, fluency in both official languages and Canadian work experience. However, because many would-be immigrants had already applied under the older, more lenient regulations -- and paid the $500 processing fee -- Mr. Coderre announced the government would extend the deadline for processing old applications to March 31, 2003, from Dec. 31, 2002. His announcement followed the recommendation of a parliamentary committee, which was told by a senior bureaucrat that the backlog, estimated to be approximately 30,000 applicants, could be erased within three months. But in a Federal Court ruling released in February, Mr. Justice Michael Kelen reached a far different conclusion. He said the department supplied "significantly incorrect numbers" to the parliamentary committee, and when bureaucrats realized the backlog actually affected between 80,000 and 120,000 people, they "did not inform Parliament of this error." In the process, he said, the government pocketed $125-million while ignoring "the outstanding applicants as if there was no looming deadline." The judge ordered all 102 prospective immigrants who filed the claim to be immediately appraised under the old criteria. Government lawyers filed an appeal, arguing that although Judge Kelen's decision did not encompass every immigrant caught in the backlog, the case had the potential to set a dangerous and costly precedent. A three-judge panel dismissed the appeal, saying the issue is moot because the 102 applicants have already been interviewed according to the expired regulations. That ruling paves the way for every other immigrant hampered by the rule change to file a similar suit. More than 7,000 -- a combination of 78 separate claims -- have already done so. Lawyers representing those litigants say unless the government wants to spend billions of dollars fighting each of the claims in court, Mr. Coderre has little choice but to assess them under the old rules. "They've got to reconsider what they're doing," said Marvin Moses, who represents some of the immigrants who filed the original suit. "If they had devoted their resources equally the way they have devoted them for these 100 cases, there wouldn't need to be so long in due processing." Diane Ablonczy, the immigration critic for the Canadian Alliance, called on Mr. Coderre not to appeal Thursday's ruling to the Supreme Court of Canada. "This is a department that says it does not have enough money to properly process applications overseas, and yet they've got money to cover their backside through all kinds of appeals and legal avenues," she said yesterday. "They should check their priorities." Ms. Ablonczy also said the bureaucrats who lied to Parliament should be punished. "As a Canadian and as a democratic, it is just outrageous that a government could actually mislead the democratically elected Parliament of a country with impunity and then try to hide behind court appeals to disguise that fact," she said. "This is about the reputation of our country internationally. We said to people: 'These are the rules. Here's the fee.' And then after people did all of that, we changed the rules in the middle of the game." mfriscolanti@nationalpost.com
ELIZABETH THOMPSON
The immigration department should process tens of thousands of prospective immigrants under the rules that were in effect when they applied, said the chairperson of Parliament's Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. "I would rather spend money on processing good people and making sure that they qualify when they come in than spending money tied up in courts and lawyers and so on," Joe Fontana, Liberal MP for th e Ontario riding of London North Centre, said in an interview.Fontana said the committee was concerned from the start about the government's plan to use new criteria. "We were very, very concerned about the retroactive provisions of the bill." However, Citizenship and Immigration Minister Denis Coderre vowed yesterday to push ahead with the government's plans for handling the transition to the new immigration law, despite court cases that have been filed on behalf of thousands of prospective immigrants who believe they have a better chance of getting into Canada under the old rules. The controversy centres on the government's decision last year to overhaul its immigration act and to change the selection criteria for those seeking to come to Canada. While the government told parliament there were only 30,000 people waiting to be processed when the rules changed, in February a Federal Court judge found that Coderre's department misled parliament, and there were actually up to 120,000 caught in the backlog. The Federal Court ruling, and last week's dismissal of Coderre's appeal, has sparked lawsuits on behalf of more than 5,800 people who were in the process of immigrating to Canada when the rules changed. Yesterday, Coderre said he won't appeal last week's ruling. Nor will he give in to those who have filed court actions to force him to process them under the old selection criteria. Testifying before the committee, Coderre said the government adopted reasonable measures for those caught by the transition, allowing them to qualify with fewer points, extending deadlines and allowing many to get refunds for their application fees. ethompson@thegazette.canwest.com
ELIZABETH THOMPSON
Immigration Minister Denis Coderre has lost his bid to reverse
a Federal Court ruling that found his department misled
Parliament.
In a ruling rendered verbally from the bench Thursday and in writing yesterday, the Federal Court of Appeal said the case is now moot because those involved have received the Immigration Department interviews that they had been seeking. However, the ruling clears the way for lawsuits filed on behalf of thousands of people who were in the process of immigrating to Canada when the federal government abruptly changed the selection criteria. If they win, the federal government could have to reverse its position and process their applications under the previous criteria or pay out hundreds of millions of dollars in reimbursements or damages. "There is a very big potential liability here," said immigration lawyer Lorne Waldman, who persuaded the court to dismiss Coderre's appeal. The case centres on the government's decision last year to overhaul its selection criteria for people seeking to immigrate to Canada, imposing tougher standands in areas such as education and language proficiency. At one point, the government extended the deadline for processing applicants under the old law, telling parliament's immigration committee that it should be enough time to process a backlog of 30,000 applications. In February, however, Federal Court Justice Michael Kelen ruled that officials had misled the committee about the size of the backlog. Instead of 30,000 applicants, there were 80,000 to 120,000 applications that were waiting to be processed. While Kelen's ruling only applied to the 102 prospective immigrants who had taken the case to court, it has opened the gates for thousands of others in the backlog who believe they have a better chance of coming to Canada under the old selection criteria than under the new rules. Immigration lawyer Richard Kurland said at least a dozen law firms including his own have filed lawsuits on behalf of prospective immigrants caught in the backlog, many of them from Asia. In many cases, the applicants are married and while one of the partners has a university education in areas such as computers or engineering, their spouse does not - making it more difficult to get into Canada under the new rules. The solution, said Kurland, is for Ottawa to agree to process all those caught in the backlog under the rules that were in place when they first applied. In its ruling yesterday, the Federal Court of Appeal said 78 cases that have been filed in the Federal Court's trial division, representing an estimated 5,800 prospective immigrants. Waldman puts the number of people involved in the various lawsuits much higher, at 7,400. Officials in the Immigration Department and Coderre's office were tight lipped yesterday, saying lawyers are studying the ruling to determine what to do next. Diane Ablonczy, Canadian Alliance immigration critic, said the government should abandon any idea of appealing the Federal Court of Appeal ruling to the Supreme Court. "The bottom line is that Denis Coderre should be doing what he promised these applicants he would do and that is to process them in a timely manner under the rules that were in place when they applied. That is the fair and honorable thing to do." Ablonczy said there should also be a review of how the issue has been handled. "This is a huge black eye for the minister and his department for which there should be serious consequences. We need to identify who was responsible for lying to parliament, who was responsible for the decisions that led to these applications not being processed as promised. Those individuals should be sanctioned." ethompson@thegazette.canwest.com Backlog case can go to appeal New hope for would-be immigrants Coderre on hot seat after rule change VALERIE LAWTON OTTAWA BUREAU - Toronto Star - March 8th 2003; OTTAWA—Tens of thousands of would-be immigrants who don't meet strict new criteria could get a fresh chance to enter Canada, an immigration lawyer said after a judge's ruling yesterday cleared the way for the issue to go to an appeal court. The new Federal Court decision is the latest chapter in a controversy over the immigration department's decision to make the tougher entrance requirements retroactive — effectively changing the rules for a backlog of people who'd already been waiting months or years for their applications to be processed.Federal Court Justice Michael Kelen had already ruled last month that 102 prospective immigrants who went to court should be processed under the old rules because the department had misled and ignored Parliament about the backlog. The second part of his judgment, released late yesterday, clears the path for an appeal. "It opens the door for us to take retroactivity to the appeal court so that all of the other backlogged immigration applicants can hopefully avoid the retroactive laws," Toronto lawyer David Rosenblatt said. The case has put Immigration Minister Denis Coderre in the hot seat. The Canadian Alliance argued he should be fired after the judge found Coderre's officials had drastically underestimated the number of outstanding applications at a parliamentary committee hearing. Officials suggested there were 30,000 backlogged applications, when in fact there are between 80,000 and 120,000, the judge found. As well, the department "did not inform Parliament of this error when it became evident," he wrote in the ruling. Based on the department's figures, a parliamentary committee had recommended a three-month extension to allow applicants already in the pipeline to be processed under the old rules. Coderre acted on that, but it's now clear three months was not nearly enough time to deal with the backlog. Coderre compounded his political problems by calling Kelen's decision a "draft decision." His comment prompted the judge to take the highly unusual step of issuing a statement describing his ruling as final. Yesterday, Coderre said calling the judge's decision a draft was a matter of "legal jargon." He continued to deny his staff hadn't been honest about the backlog.
Lawyers are buzzing as jurist steps up to say cabinet
minister's opinion is wrong OTTAWA -- A Federal Court of Canada judge has engaged in an
unusual tussle with a federal cabinet minister, openly Mr. Justice Michael Kelen took the surprising step
yesterday of issuing a statement to insist his ruling is
final, not a "draft The statement -- which appears to be a direct rebuke of the
minister though it does not name him -- stunned many in the
It is unprecedented for a judge to publicly join the debate
about a decision after it has been delivered -- and even rarer
to Judge Kelen's statement came after a week in which Mr.
Coderre not only repeatedly said the original decision was
merely The Feb. 21 decision by Judge Kelen stated that senior
officials misled Parliament by underestimating the number of
Yesterday, Judge Kelen issued a one-paragraph "oral
direction" sent out to lawyers in the case by the court's
registry "The order and reasons on the above noted file are final as
of February 21, 2003 (and are not considered draft) as to the
Mr. Coderre's office had no comment. Canadian judges normally do not issue clarifications after their rulings, instead letting decisions speak for themselves. "It really is unusual for a judge to provide that kind of
clarification on the status of their decision," said Gordon
Maynard, David Dyzenhaus, a University of Toronto expert on judicial
independence, said Judge Kelen might have felt it necessary to
"I think, in a way, the minister's position could be seen
by a judge as tending to undermine confidence in the
administration Judge Kelen was appointed to the bench by Prime Minister
Jean Chrétien two years ago. At one time, he was a partner at
the same Ottawa firm Immigration officials told a parliamentary committee last
year that most cases would be processed by the end of 2002.
But Judge Kelen heard Judge Kelen found the Immigration Department made no effort
to follow Parliament's wish to ensure that most of those
people had their When Canadian Alliance immigration critic Diane Ablonczy
questioned Mr. Coderre about the ruling in the House of
Commons on Feb. 24, the In fact, the judge's decision was final, although like many
court decisions, it can be subject to appeal to a higher
court. Lawyers for the But on Feb. 25, when Ms. Ablonczy challenged Mr. Coderre's
assertion, Mr. Coderre insisted "the court has not made a
final decision" and The next day, he snapped that Alliance MP Vic Toews was "unable to do homework, or comprehend the Immigration Act." Mr. Toews, the former attorney-general of Manitoba and
long-time lawyer, said he was stunned to hear Mr. Coderre --
who is not a lawyer -- "When I get a guy like that, who has made such a blatant
error, then attack me personally and Diane -- it's just
unacceptable," Mr. Toews said
JUSTICE REPORTER; With a report from Campbell Clark -Thursday, Feb. 27, 2003 ( Globe & Mail) Federal officials who knowingly misled Parliament about the
size of an immigration waiting list deprived almost 100,000
But the government cannot justify leaving the applicants in
limbo, they say, in light of a court ruling that says 102 of
them In his ruling, Federal Court of Canada Judge Michael Kelen
found that Citizenship and Immigration Canada officials gave
As a result, he said, a Commons immigration committee was
misled into believing only 30,000 applicants were in danger of
The committee was extremely concerned that the policy not
change in mid-stream and cheat any of the applicants who were
But in reality, Judge Kelen said, immigration officials
knew that the backlog was several times higher, and that the
vast Almost 100,000 applications ultimately missed the deadline. Judge Kelen also found that the department pocketed a
$125-million profit on its visa operation even as it ignored
its "The evidence before this Court is that the [department]
made no such effort, and treated the outstanding applications
as if He ruled that it was wrong for the department to change the
ground rules after people had paid substantial fees and,
through "We are calling on Parliament to do something about this,"
said lawyer David Rosenblatt, president of the Federation for
"These people had spent thousands of dollars on fees, on
lawyers and on courier service to speed their applications
along," Guidy Mamann, a Toronto immigration lawyer, said those who
were cheated by the bureaucratic sleight-of-hand are left The vast majority had no hope of qualifying under the new,
more demanding immigration criteria that came into effect
after the deadline, he said. He said the department clearly raised the criteria so it
could both eliminate its backlog and increase the power of
visa officials to subjectively "All of a sudden, they had a legal justification for
refusing tens of thousands of cases -- and still keep their
money," Mr. Mamann said. "It is "They knew exactly how many applications were in the
pipeline," he added. "They knew it up to that date, up to that
minute. There could be no Citizenship and Immigration Minister Denis Coderre, who
originally dismissed the Federal Court judgment as a "draft
ruling," insisted yesterday However, some Liberal backbenchers, including immigration
committee chairman Joe Fontana, said they intend to push Mr.
Coderre to treat the "Where's the fair play?" asked Scarborough-Agincourt MP Jim Karygiannis. Judge Kelen noted that the applicants "have followed the
Canadian rules and Canadian law to seek admission to Canada.
They are not Mr. Mamann said abuses of this sort discourage people from pursuing regular, legal channels to enter Canada. "It's like someone being in line for three years, and when
he finally gets to the front counter, he's told: 'The rules
have changed, and by the way,
Court rejects change in entry rules New law unfair to immigrants 170,000 could be affected NICOLAAS VAN RIJN - STAFF REPORTER Immigrants applying to come to Canada
should be assessed under the rules in effect at the time of
their application, Yesterday's decision by Mr. Justice
Michael Kelen orders Citizenship and Immigration Canada to
process 102 But Kelen's decision could have an
impact on more than 170,000 immigration applications now in
the pipeline, said "Basically, they changed the rules in
mid-process, and then applied those new rules to people who
had already "Although the judge applied the decision
to only these 102 cases, people who filed before Dec. 31,
2001, we think it The change in rules, the lawyers argue,
stranded many applicants who had already paid thousands of
dollars in "The new regulations discriminate
against unmarried applicants and people from certain
countries," Rosenblatt said. But instead of a backlog of some 30,000
cases, as Parliament had been told, the department was looking
at more Calls to the immigration department were
not returned.
The minister must accept responsibility for his
mistakes, apologize and deal Vancouver Sun Thursday, February 27, 2003 Out of sight, out of mind seems to be the philosophy
Immigration Minister Denis Coderre is following First, Mr. Coderre dragged his heels on processing the
applications of more than 100,000 immigrants, The new Immigration Act imposes stronger education and
language proficiency standards on those The spectre of applying laws retroactively seems to give
Mr. Coderre little cause for concern. It may Fortunately, some applicants already took their cases to
cour t and, in a scathing decision delivered In his judgment, Justice Kelen harshly criticized the
minister for ignoring the recommendations of a Specifically, Justice Kelen said that Citizenship and
Immigration Canada failed to follow the Further, CIC failed to invest into the process a
$125-million surplus from visa applicants, and it closed While Mr. Coderre did follow the committee's recommendation
to extend the time limit for processing The backlog actually contains 80,000 to 100,000
applications, and Justice Kelen therefore said that Mr. On Monday, Mr. Coderre dismissed the accusations, saying he
always gave Parliament correct And he found an easy way to deal with the court's
accusations that he ignored the parliamentary Mr. Coderre refused to comment directly on the judgment,
referring to it as a "draft," and his That came as news to a Federal Court of Canada
representative who said, "It is not a draft ruling or Critics are furious with Mr. Coderre, and Canadian Alliance
immigration critic Diane Ablonczy has called Even Liberals are taking him to task. Joe Fontana, chairman
of the parliamentary committee, confirmed The outrage is understandable. At the very least, Mr.
Coderre's handling of this matter represents one But Mr. Coderre's actions have taken things one step beyond incompetence. His utter failure to admit to even inadvertent mistakes,
and his readiness to apply retroactive laws to If Mr. Coderre is to rehabilitate his portfolio, he must
accept responsibility for his mistakes and Then, to make good on those apologies, he must deal fairly
and expeditiously with all applications that
Alliance calls for minister's resignation after
ineptitude affects more than Peter O'Neil OTTAWA -- Citizenship and Immigration Canada misled and
ignored Parliament last year, according to The federal ministry was found to have dragged its heels on
processing a backlog of immigration Justice Michael Kelen's decision directly affects 102
people who will now have a fresh chance to enter But the ruling should force the federal government to open
the door to more than 100,000 others who "This is a complete betrayal of trust in people whose
applications were accepted and who expected to Vancouver immigration lawyer Richard Kurland said he will
launch a lawsuit to either force the governm Coderre announced last year that the government would
extend the deadline for the processing of The extension followed the recommendation of a
parliamentary committee, which said the department But the committee based its recommendation for a
three-month extension on the testimony of a senior Atkinson told MPs that the department anticipated a backlog
of 30,000 applicants by Jan. 1, 2003, and "Based on the evidence before this court, which was subject
to cross-examination, it is clear that [the "Rather than the 30,000 such applications expected to be
outstanding as of Dec. 31, 2002, the Kelen further wrote that the department "did not inform
Parliament of this error when it became He also wrote that the Immigration Department "ignored" all
four recommendations from the The department "ignored the legislative purpose and intent
of extending the time frame for assessing The department also failed to invest more resources despite
a $125 million surplus paid by visa CIC spokeswoman Susan Scarlett would comment only indirectly on the decision. "We are pleased that the court upheld the validity of our
legislation. We are reviewing the decision Ablonczy said MPs and Canadians were misled on immigration
just as they were on the spiralling costs "Parliament has once again been misled, I think deliberately," she said. "Either he (Coderre) knew, or if he didn't know,
why the hell is he the minister?"
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| © SIT Canada 2002 |
home | our services | contact us | f a q | email | Useful Links |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
