Weak screening? The hidden security risks in Canada's refugee system | Dr Kelly Sundberg's testimony

本站添加: 2026-04-30

[00:00:00]Thank you, Madam Chair, vice chairs, members of the committee. Uh, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I'm Dr. Kelly Sunberg, a criminologist and professor at Mount Royal University in Calgary. Uh, before entering academia, I served for more than 15 years with what is today the CBSA. Uh and from the onset uh I want to be clear that I firmly believe in lawful im immigration in refugee protection and that I take great pride in our nation's long-standing commitment to supporting those who genuinely seek refugee protection from Canada. Nevertheless, our immigration system cannot remain credible if it's not competent, enforcable, and aimed at building public trust. Over the past two years, our government has clearly recognized that our systems are under great strain.

[00:00:46]We've seen changes to international student permits, temporary resident uh uh volumes, visa requirements, refugee eligibility rules, and border integrity measures. Changes that echo uh what many practitioners have been saying for years, capacity and enforcement matter.

[00:01:02]But recognizing the problem is not the same as fixing it. Uh Canada's immigration and refugee system remains under great pressure. We see this in refugee backlogs, uh limited screening, and delayed removals. More moreover, we also see this in strains being transferred to provincial municipal governments which are left to absorb downstream costs and housing, schooling, healthcare, policing, and social services.

[00:01:26]Most concerning is the widening gap between what federal immigration policy promises and what the system can actually deliver. Unfortunately, this gap is contributing to growing public frustration and a deeper erosion of confidence in our federal institutions.

[00:01:39]The Immigration Refugee Board's own numbers are alarming. In fiscal year 2425, the refugee protection division finalized more than 78,700 cases while receiving approximately 170,000 asylum claim referrals. As of March uh 31st, 2025, more than 175,800 claims uh uh ready to be were ready to be heard with another 105,500 claims incomplete because of pending security screening and other outstanding requirements. These numbers don't describe a timely or adequately resourced system. They describe an overwhelmed one. And when these systems are overwhelmed, everyone suffers.

[00:02:18]Genuine refugees wait too long for protection. Weak or disingenuous claims remain unresolved. Enforcement actions are delayed. Provinces and municipalities carry the burden and public confidence erodess. To this point, I believe both sides of the current debate have part of the truth, though not the whole truth. Our government is right in speaking about sustainability, integration, and protecting Canada's humanitarian commitments. But those words only mean something if the system can competently screen, process, decide, support, and where necessary remove people in a timely and fair manner. The oppos the opposition's critique is also valid for identifying enforcement, removals, social service pressures, and public confidence as serious issues. These are not imaginary concerns. Nevertheless, we must we must not treat refugees or newcomers as the problem. Frankly, the problem is not refugees or immigrants.

[00:03:08]It's system failure. My research has found that approximately 12.5% of executed terrorist attacks and approximately 50% of publicly known and thwarted plots involved individuals who entered Canada through asylum pathways or were seeking asylum. Importantly, my research also shows that the overwhelming majority of asylum seekers are peaceful, law-abiding people who simply want safety and a better life.

[00:03:33]Nevertheless, the data does clearly show that asylum pathways are being exploited by a small but high consequence cohort of bad actors. This distinction matters.

[00:03:44]Weak screening does not protect refugees. It harms them. When security failures occur, public anxiety rarely stays focused on the individual offender. Rather, it unfortunately uh spills into generalization uh generalized resentment toward refugees, immigrants, international students, and other news newcomers.

[00:04:03]While this clearly is unfair, it is also sadly predictable. For these reasons, I urge the committee to consider six practical areas. First, Canada needs better risk informed intelligence-led screening, especially of those who are seeking entry from failed states, hostile regimes, areas of civil war, terrorism, and organized crime. Canada cannot rely on a system predicated on mostly self-declaration. Second, Canada must recognize where and when refugee claims are made. As a general principle, refugee claims should be made abroad or immediately upon arrival at a port of entry. Inland cla claims must remain possible, of course, but they should be exceptions and require clear justification.

[00:04:45]Third, Canada must improve immigrant supports, including an increased investment in language and skills training, foreign credential recognition, civic orientation, and education on Canadian laws, rights, responsibilities, and expectations.

[00:05:01]Fourth, Canada must improve its intelligence investigations and enforcement capacities so investigations are more comprehensive removals more timely with a greater foreign fugitive apprehension capacity and stronger inter agency coordination including better global information sharing. Fifth, Canada must fix removals. Once due process is exhausted, removal must actually occur. If removal orders aren't enforced, the law loses credibility.

[00:05:29]Finally, sixth, Canada should consider consolidating its immigration and border security, overseas leaison efforts, immigration and customs intelligence, exit tracking and maritime border integrity with a single integrated national security focused agency. In essence, I suggest transforming the Canada Border Services Agency into the Canada Border Security Agency.

[00:05:48]>> Thank you, Professor Sunberg. You are way over time and I've been very kind to you. So, I just wanted you to get through your recommendations. So, thank you very much.

[00:05:58]Uh, thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the visitors for our witnesses for being here today. I appreciate that.

[00:06:03]Um, Mr. Sunberg, Bill C12 was recently passed and it's being implemented as we speak. And one of the provisions uh, of course, prevents asylum claims that are longer than a year. And so, I've heard that that might create as many as 30,000 new um, removal orders for CBSA. Can Can the current CBSA staffing handle 30,000 new removal orders?

[00:06:26]>> No.

[00:06:27]No, it can't. Um CBSA has and it's very difficult to get data from uh but roughly 420 officers nationally and when we think of uh the officers that would be tasked with uh a lot of this work uh they're doing many other things and uh frankly with the volumes that we're seeing uh we need to have comparable staffing to process process this both from from all components from uh processing the the the applicants but also enforcing this.

[00:07:04]Uh we need we do have a lot of individuals who came here as students over the last few years, tens of thousands who have made refugee claims that are going to add to that backlog.

[00:07:15]And um when you only have a handful of officers um and if we trust the government's own uh analysis of the happiness of officers or their job satisfaction, the CBSA is on the lower end of that spectrum.

[00:07:32]>> So uh just sorry to interrupt, but I have a very limited time. So sorry. So you talk to CBSA officers. Um what's the government telling them then if if if there if there's all these people to process and they don't have the capacity is the government telling them what are they telling them to do?

[00:07:47]You know, I I I do speak with uh the union and with officers. Um and the the question they have is why are we not seeing uh if we have this cancellation of of a lot of the uh the status, why are we not seeing them going to PRA? Um the pre- removal risk assessment process. Um >> and and why aren't they going to pro?

[00:08:13]I I you know I resourcing um it's uh it's a >> so so you bring you brought up the pre- removal assessment order of the pro it's one of the ways that an asylum claimant can delay the removal from Canada. Um do do PRs effectively bar CBSA from removing someone?

[00:08:34]>> Yes.

[00:08:34]>> Yes. Um I in speaking in addition to CBSA officers I do speak of course I'm coming to this from a criminological perspective I do speak with members of the uh with with various police departments across the country uh who often are becoming more and more frustrated with the fact that uh when they do inter uh apprehend somebody for uh an alleged breach of the law that um it the the the refugee claim is then uh used as a a means of of delaying the both the criminal process and the removal. It's it's uh it is a a system that uh is definitely not efficient and effective um but one that uh is also very disjointed and uh this is unfair to everybody but it's uh coming from uh a part of the country where this is a increasing growing concern. Um, >> right. So when when someone gets a removal order and they know that they can do a pro, uh, they don't have to though, right? They can they can self-deport. Does that happen very often?

[00:09:43]>> Self-deportation is increasing. Uh, the allowed to leave, >> right? Is it a large percentage of people, small? What's your guess?

[00:09:51]>> You know, and it would be a guess. Uh, because again, the data is very difficult to get uh nailed down. Um the delay is so incredible uh for these that uh we do see some that are leaving on their depends really if they're in custody or not also. Um but the PRA has become a a a bottleneck in in the system and and uh and the HNC actually is as uh the the the other witnesses mentioned that these are these are the the the time delay is just >> Yeah. You spoke about the uh integration of different departments. We have IRCC, we have CBSA, we have the IRB, we have uh and then we have local law enforcement, everything else. When IRCC has information about the AB admissibility or fraud concerns, is that information consistently quickly shared with CBSA?

[00:10:45]>> No.

[00:10:46]>> Okay. And when IRB hears a refugee claim, does it always have the security information it needs from CBSA or IRCC?

[00:10:54]>> No. So, and I've I've heard this before from others that these organizations don't work well together. Um, it is that what you're hearing as well and and how does that how >> that is probably the number one issue I hear?

[00:11:07]>> Wow. So, what's the solution to that?

[00:11:11]I believe that we uh as I said in my my uh last in my opening remarks, I I do believe that uh we and I was one of the people that worked in this city when we after 9/11. Um we do need I believe we need to coordinate so that the Canada Border Services Agency is the agency that's that's responsible for the security of this program and the integrity of it. That is not to say that I believe in um uh the policing or the the militarization of of our immigration programs, but I do believe that uh to have a valid program, we need to have security to that. Uh and my research which is focused on terrorism uh counterterrorism um clearly shows that there is a disproportionate number of individuals who have been uh apprehended in the plotting of terrorist attacks in this country who have entered this country through those streams. I attribute that to um lack of screening, lack of commitment to security. And in my 15 years, uh during my my time as an officer with what is the CBSA, uh I have arrested and removed people who have done heinous heinous crimes um and the amount of time.

[00:12:25]>> Thank you, Professor Sunberg. We're way over time. Thank you, uh Mr. Ratikop. Uh next, we have six six minutes for Mr. Fragiscatos. Mr. Fred Scatos.

[00:12:35]>> Thank you, chair. Thank you to the witnesses for being here today. Uh, Professor Sun Sunberg, excuse me. I'll begin with you. Might actually just stay with you. Uh, there's a second round, but I wanted to u to ask you first, sir, a number of interesting points came up.

[00:12:50]Uh, first, your research on refugee claimants. You said that your research, if I understood you correctly, you said that the research indicates that the vast majority of refugee claimments are here for on legitimate grounds.

[00:13:02]>> Absolutely.

[00:13:03]>> Okay. Do you have numbers to that effect?

[00:13:06]>> Oh, sorry. The It's well well into the '9s percentage.

[00:13:13]Yes. It's this I and I and to clarify, I don't I don't research I research terrorism.

[00:13:18]>> That's and national security issues. uh that's my area of research. It just happens that when I look at the case the cases of those who engage in these uh in terrorist acts uh or attempted terrorist acts, I do look at their backgrounds um and how did how did they come here or to our five eye partners >> um and uh when we do have a system and a lot of the and when I do speak with groups the the group that is probably one of the loudest and most concerned are newcomers to our country often who are exploited by other newcomers who are exploiting them for uh gain. I mean, when we the RCMP uh has indicated that we have 4,000 uh different organized crime groups that work in this country, and we start looking at how we've seen the uh various groups come into our country, remain in this country, and then exploit other newcomers. That's where I'm getting at is that you have to have a system where we're protecting immigrants, and that requires enforcement. Um, and when you only have 420 officers that are specifically tasked to this at a national level, that's just it's window dressing. You left us, thank you for that. You left us with a few recommendations. One, if I understood you correctly, was on the administrative side in terms of the public service.

[00:14:37]You're calling for CBSA to come together with IRCC. Can you just go over that again?

[00:14:45]>> Yeah. So I mean when we have when we think of uh the different agencies and I'm speaking on the enforcement side of the programs >> uh when we have the RCMP you have CEUS you have uh CBSA the the discoordination between these we have the RCMP that's tasked with doing border security in some of our provinces we see the provincial governments that have implemented their own border patrols that sort of thing. um the the disconnect between the and even within uh within the federal government with the RCMP, CBSA that we're just not seeing the working together and the coordination and the uh the moving forward. So I suggest we follow what the Australians have done. Have one agency that's responsible for the integrity enforcement of the program, staff it so that it's able to actually do its job.

[00:15:34]Um, and of course we have to have the immigration department that's that's driving this, but you need to have the you need to have an enforcement component that is effective. And we're a huge country and having the number of agencies that have a little bit of responsibility here and there. by having it in one then it's uh um it's just going to be more efficient, effective and at the end of the day we'll see that uh others who are engaged can do other jobs such as the RCMP looking at federal policing matters. So it's really an efficiency issue and I the Australians there's there's been very good success in the in the in Australia in their approach and I think that we should probably follow that.

[00:16:15]>> Okay. So, uh, you talk about enforcement. What you're really talking about are deportations when it's determined that an individual should no longer be here. In Australia, they have an an agency that's responsible for this specific >> the border force >> objective. Yeah.

[00:16:30]>> Um, I I actually believe that the best thing we could do as a nation is put our focus abroad so that we engage in the c so that we're actively engaged in helping. We have a proud peacekeeping tradition. We have uh we have very limited foreign intelligence unfortunately among the five eyes when I do meet with uh with members of that and I go to the we're referred to as the lazy eye out of the five eyes and Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States um we do not have the we do not have the staffing abroad, the intelligence capacity to to address these issues uh to to identify um the risks and to >> I don't mean to cut you offer My time is talk more about the Australian example though. So this >> this agency and we can look it up of course but it's it's recent I take it and and what what is this agency specifically tasked with?

[00:17:27]>> They are in essence the immigration customs border services. They work uh handinhand with the Australian uh foreign intelligence services Azio. Um and in essence they take and they have >> one minute. Oh, sorry. They have they're working with the with the with the administrative components for their their uh their country for Australia, but their focus is ensuring and it's very much preventative looking uh looking abroad. So, they have officers that uh are abroad.

[00:17:59]>> It's a good model and it's uh it's more preventative focused uh as opposed to reactive. I think it's a it's a very good model. Now, I'm not saying that all the aspects of the Australian system are great, >> but they do have some they do have some components that I think are great. I mean, like anything, >> I think there's a great deal of utility in looking to G7 partners, Fiveey Five's allies to see what they're doing and um and not copying to say to use that term, but there's a context here that's unique to our country, but we can certainly learn from examples. So, thank you very much for sharing that.

[00:18:33]>> Yeah, thank you.

[00:18:34]>> Thank you. Um Mr. Sunberg, uh you might have heard the story. It's in quite a quite a a big story in the news today that uh Medi Taj who's a IRGC commander who was coming to Canada to watch some FIFA soccer uh was apparently given a temporary resident permit came to Canada then he was uh the government I think saw the light and decided that we shouldn't be letting IRGC terrorists into Canada and so they apparently turned him around and sent him back. Um, to me, this is a a horrible example of incompetence in the screening of our security system because we we clearly know that we don't allow IRGC uh terrorists into Canada. Yet, it appears that he was given a TRP uh to come to Canada. He landed in Canada. Uh, is this something you've seen before? And what does that point to our security lacking system in our systems in Canada?

[00:19:28]Uh I mean I'm glad that the the the port of entry did the their work but I it does come into screening and this is my point is that if we have a proactive system where we have the resources and the uh abroad um we can uh we can identify those who are members of high ranking members of regimes that are seeking entry to this country. uh when we think about uh issues of fraud or people that are are in in uh taking advantage of uh refugees, one answer is to have enough officers to arrest and prosecute people who do this. So my view is is that there's a balance here and uh we need to have a much much stronger uh international presence. So, a quick question. It seems like he was given a temporary resident permit, which as I understand, it's kind of the backup. If if you fail the main system, and if if you're detected and declined, you can always go to that one and they'll let you in. Is that is that a common thing you've seen?

[00:20:23]>> Yes.

[00:20:25]>> So, that's that's not a one-time thing.

[00:20:26]It's the TRP is kind of the back door into the system. If you fail the screening that we do, >> the TRP is used. Yes, the TRP system is the processes that is used. I mean, I >> Yes. Thank you, Professor Sunberg, and thank you, uh, Mr.