“We have to fit people’s lives into administrative boxes. But people’s lives don’t fit into boxes. Our system [d’immigration] is complicated for nothing. »
It is the cry from the heart launched by Me Benjamin Brunot, in an article published Monday on delays at Immigration Canada1.
After 15 years of trying to put people’s lives into boxes, the immigration lawyer has come to a sad conclusion: beneath its beautiful appearance of openness, the Canadian immigration system is “dehumanizing.”
For my part, after 25 years of telling Kafkaesque stories of immigration, I have come to another disturbing observation: as if by chance, when the media highlight these stories, the bureaucratic machine suddenly, sometimes, seems to find a bit of humanity.
That should make us journalists happy. But actually, it’s quite annoying.
We are of course happy for all these people whose lives have changed for the better thanks to the work of the media.
Remember these French doctors based in the Laurentians whose work permit renewal was refused by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) on September 26. My colleague Isabelle Hachey told their story2. As if by magic, after the media coverage of the case, the case was resolved.
Remember the case of this other French doctor, established in Montérégie, who risked no longer being able to practice at the Hôtel-Dieu in Sorel, due to not being able to speak to a human at IRCC to regularize his situation. My colleague Émilie Bilodeau told her story3. The same day, as if by magic for him too, he obtained the renewal of his work permit.
Same scenario in one of the cases reported Monday by Émilie. A father from Central Africa, having fled persecution, who found himself without a work permit at the end of September, even though he had taken care to apply for a renewal last March. From one day to the next, the family of eight had to manage to survive on the sole salary of the mother, who works part-time at a Walmart. Here again, when the 98.5 and The Press were interested in the story, the file could suddenly be unlocked.
These are just a few cases recorded in the last month. But the list has been stretching endlessly for years.
As I said, we can only be happy for all these people whose lives have changed for the better after the media coverage of their setbacks. But every time I see these kinds of stories, it makes me angry too. It’s not normal to wait for the media to take an interest in a case to resolve it. It’s not normal for journalists to do the work that IRCC officials should have done from the start.
You should also know that the effectiveness of media relay is variable. If an article only concerns the fundamental rights of an asylum seeker with whom people struggle to identify, it will most often have a lesser impact than if we talk about a French doctor, underlines Me Brunot, who is an administrator at the Quebec Association of Lawyers in Immigration Law.
The most annoying part of all this is knowing that once we have resolved an individual case, we have, in reality, not resolved much. The structural problem remains, as evidenced by all the stories that arouse only indifference, the desperate testimonies that rain down after each article and the recent report from the Auditor General of Canada on the long wait for new arrivals to obtain their permanent residence.
For a story highlighted in the media that ends well, how many other heartbreaking journeys that, in the shadows, end very badly? How many lives broken?
We had part of the answer in the devastating report from the Auditor General: far too much. IRCC “has long had difficulty meeting its service standards for its permanent residence programs,” we read. Delays are particularly long and difficult for refugees4. After surviving exile, they must try to survive the cold slowness of Canadian bureaucracy.
What can be done to humanize the immigration system?
Me Brunot primarily proposes two solutions which seem to make sense to me.
The first: ensuring that people can talk to a human at IRCC, who can understand that their lives do not fit into small boxes.
Hiring humans is an expensive measure, of course. But when you consider the human cost of today’s dysfunctional bureaucracy, it’s a worthwhile investment.
The second: simplify the immigration process. It is useless and counterproductive to multiply the boxes in increasingly long and complex administrative forms, which betray a fear of strangers and the open door. This only increases the risk of errors, which lead to automatic rejections of good faith candidates because of an insignificant detail (for example, making a mistake in entering an old address or listing travel over the last few years).
As immigration to Canada, as in all countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, reaches a record level, let us hope that the humanization and simplification of the process ends up in the “URGENT” box.
IRCC says it is exercising due diligence
If we want to reduce delays and the risk of errors in immigration files, why not hire officials who can be spoken to in person? IRCC “is aware of the concerns identified in the audit report,” Nancy Caron, IRCC spokesperson, responded by email.
“Over the past several years, we have been diligent in addressing these issues as part of our commitment to improving customer service and building a stronger immigration system. Since the audit was conducted, IRCC has continued to reduce its backlogs by digitizing applications, hiring and training new staff, and using automation technologies to increase processing capacity and efficiency. »
As for whether there is a need to simplify the process, IRCC says it is aware of the need to modernize and strengthen the immigration system “to meet the challenges associated with welcoming a larger number of people”.
“IRCC continues to improve customer services based on feedback from our clients. The ministry is modernizing by adapting, modifying and reinventing the way services are provided to clients, for example by providing application status tracking for several programs. »