Immigration Amendments Unpacked

Royal assent received

S-8
June 22, 2023 (2 years ago)
Canadian Federal
Marc Gold
Senate
Royal assent
4 Votes
Full Title: An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations
Immigration
National Security
Social Issues

Summary

The amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act introduce new grounds for inadmissibility based on security, human rights violations, sanctions, and organized criminal activity. The policy aims to streamline immigration processes related to these areas, while broadening the scope for restricting entry or residency.

What it means for you

The changes may impact various groups, especially refugees and individuals seeking protection in Canada. Those affected could include people fleeing conflict or persecution, as the broader definition of inadmissibility might inadvertently include them. Additionally, many families and communities may feel the consequences if their members are unjustly deemed inadmissible.

Expenses

These amendments may lead to increased costs for the government, as more administrative resources will be required to assess and enforce the new provisions. There could also be expenses related to legal challenges from individuals contesting their inadmissibility, which may consume resources that could be used for other immigration priorities. Taxpayers may bear these costs, especially if the number of contested claims rises.

Proponents view

Supporters argue that the amendments are crucial for enhancing national security. They believe having clearer grounds for inadmissibility helps protect Canadians from individuals linked to criminal activities or human rights abuses. Additionally, allowing discretion in granting humanitarian status is viewed as a way to humanely address the complex circumstances of those seeking refuge.

Opponents view

Critics raise concerns that the broader grounds for inadmissibility could lead to unfair targeting of vulnerable populations, with arbitrariness in enforcement becoming a significant risk. The removal of the right to appeal could undermine fairness and due process, allowing for wrongful decisions that severely affect individuals' lives. They also argue that increased costs associated with legal challenges and administration could outweigh the proposed benefits in security.

Original Bill

Votes

Vote 383

That, in relation to Bill S-8, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the consideration at report stage of the bill and five hours shall be allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said bill; and That, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration at report stage and at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration at third reading stage of the said bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the stage of the bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.

For (56%)
Against (44%)
Vote 258

That the bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.

For (98%)
Paired (2%)
Vote 387

That Bill S-8, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, as amended, be concurred in at report stage.

For (99%)
Paired (1%)
Vote 386

The information is not available at this time.

For (35%)
Against (64%)
Paired (1%)