Skip to main content

Immigration and Settlement

Age of Dependency

Resolution number
2
Whereas

The Government of Canada is proposing to reduce the maximum age of dependants in the Immigration and Refuge Protection Regulations from under 22 years of age to under 19 years of age;

Therefore be it resolved

that the CCR advocate that the criteria of dependency for children remain as they currently appear in the regulations (age under 22 years, full-time students and children with a disability).

Refugee Resettlement Program Changes

Resolution number
1
Whereas
  1. The Department of Citizenship and Immigration has outlined forthcoming changes to Canada’s Refugee Resettlement Program that use both protection and immigration criteria and, among other changes, call for a limiting of the numbers of refugees resettled who have high needs for services and support to achieve integration; furthermore these changes will unfairly disadvantage women refugees, the elderly and other vulnerable groups;
  2. The changes include criteria for selection based on Canada’s foreign or economic interests and ministerial interests;
  3. Recent changes to Canada’s Immigration Program will ensure that more immigrants will arrive with skills and expertise that will reduce the needs for settlement and integration services and supports;
Therefore be it resolved

that the CCR advocate that:

  1. Resettlement of refugees is first and foremost a tool of protection which must be the main motivation for Canada’s refugee resettlement program;
  2. Foreign policy interests and other political or economic interests have no place in a humanitarian program;
  3. The criteria defining the ability to successfully establish in Canada have no place in an humanitarian program that focuses on protection and should be eliminated entirely from the Refugee Resettlement Regulations;
  4. Federal and provincial governments increase resources for programs and services to facilitate better integration outcomes especially when the refugee has high needs and may require different levels of support over a longer period of time.

Indigenous Peoples

Resolution number
1
Whereas
  1. The CCR’s 2003 resolution calls on its members to sensitize themselves on the issues facing First Nations communities and explore ways of having meaningful dialogue with these communities;
  2. The CCR needs to further this position by taking concrete action to strengthen relationships with indigenous communities;
  3. The CCR also must incorporate awareness of the history and present realities of indigenous peoples in our activities and our work;
Therefore be it resolved

that the CCR Consultation and summer and winter Working Group meetings acknowledge the Indigenous territory on which they take place, and where appropriate invite and involve indigenous community members.

Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP)

Resolution number
2
Whereas

The federal government announced reductions to the Interim Federal Health Program in April 2012 and these changes are slated to come into effect on June 30th, 2012.

Therefore be it resolved

that the CCR calls upon the provinces and territories:

  1. To urge the federal government to stop the changes to the Interim Federal Health Program.
  2. To consult and work with affected communities and those that work with those communities to ensure all persons affected by the announced IFHP reductions receive the health care they need.
Subject

Caregivers, Live-in Status and Family Reunification

Resolution number
4
Whereas
  1. The live-in caregiver program currently requires workers to live in the employer’s home;
  2. Living in the employer’s home creates a greater possibility for sexual and labour exploitation;
  3. The program does not allow family members to accompany the worker until they fulfill their required hours, thereby leading to family separation for a minimum period of 2 years;
Therefore be it resolved

that the CCR request that:

  1. The "live-in” requirement be removed from the conditions of the program;
  2. Caregivers’ families be allowed to accompany them or join them in Canada at any point during their participation in the program.

Visitor Visas for Parents and Grandparents

Resolution number
3
Whereas
  1. The government is introducing multiple entry visas of up to 10 years to allow parents and grandparents to visit family here as a way to address long family separations caused by processing delays;
  2. The visitors are required to purchase medical insurance in order to qualify for the visa;
  3. Canada imposes visa requirements only on some countries, mostly in the global south and those with a majority racialized population;
  4. Racialized Canadians are over-represented among those who would be most affected;
Therefore be it resolved

that the CCR demand that the government of Canada remove proof of purchase of medical insurance on the multiple ten year visas for parents and grandparents.

Increased commitment to family reunification

Resolution number
2
Whereas
  1. Family  reunification is a central objective of Canada's immigration programs
  2. The CCR has called on the government to eliminate barriers to family reunification;
  3. Extended families including parents and grandparents are important to social and economic wellbeing of families, including those of refugees and immigrants;
  4. The sponsorship of parents and grandparents have had a lower overall priority in family reunification applications for the last few years;
  5. The moratorium on these applications will close the door to some of these family members;
Therefore be it resolved

that the CCR call on the government of Canada, through CIC, to demonstrate its commitment to family reunification by:

A) rebalancing immigration levels so that families make up at least 40% of the total;

B) expanding the definition of families to reflect the realities of diverse cultural communities;

C) removing barriers to reunification by allocating the resources needed to process applications in a timely manner.

Immigration levels

Resolution number
1
Whereas
  1. Canadians, many private and public stakeholders and governments agree that Canada needs immigrants to sustain its current prosperity;
  2. Canada has received immigrants in excess of 1% of the population in several previous years and has become stronger as a result;
  3. Immigration has strengthened Canada's multicultural and multifaith fabric;
  4. Canada is attempting to fill its demographic needs through temporary rather than permanent immigration;
Therefore be it resolved

that the CCR demand that the government of Canada set immigration levels at a minimum of 1% of the population and invest the resources needed for successful settlement and integration.

Subject

Sub-Saharan African visa posts

Resolution number
2
Whereas
  1. The international community issued a call for action following the World Conference Against Racism (WCAR) held in 2001 in Durban, South Africa and the Government of Canada presented Canada’s Action Plan Against Racism in 2005;
  2. Examples of concerns include significant delays in the processing of cases in Sub Saharan African countries. Applicants face some of the longest waiting times and one of the highest rate of refusals, and the total quota of refugees accepted from the region is far lower than the extent of need identified by the UNHCR and NGOs. The recent announcement of a quota system for Quebec will reduce only the number of arrivals from Africa;
  3. This is clear evidence of systemic racism experienced by individuals of African origin across all categories of refugee protection and immigration.
Therefore be it resolved

that the CCR call on the government of Canada to take specific steps to address systemic racism evident in policy and practice in refugee protection and processing of immigration files of Sub-Saharan Africans, and reiterate the request made to the Government of Canada in resolution 7 of May 2007 and Resolution 1 of June 2010 (page 21).

Conditional Permanent Residence

Resolution number
1
Whereas
  1. The government of Canada is proposing to introduce a specified period of conditional permanent residence for some sponsored spouses and partners;
  2. Making permanent residence for the sponsored partner conditional puts all the power into the hands of sponsor, who may use the precarity of the partner’s status as a tool for manipulation;
  3. The proposed conditional permanent residency would represent a major step backwards in Canadian immigration policy, increase inequalities in relationships between spouses, and put women in particular at heightened risk of violence and exploitation;
Therefore be it resolved

that the CCR oppose conditional permanent residence for sponsored spouses and partners.