March 25, 1968


Item agreed to. 6c. Payments In accordance with terms and conditions approved by the Governor in Council to Provinces and in respect of Indian Bands under the Municipal Winter Works Incentive Program during the 1967-68 and 1968-69 fiscal years of amounts not exceeding fifty per cent of the cost of labour incurred in a five-month period commencing either November 1 or December 1, 1967, as selected by the Province or Indian Band, and in the case of projects in designated areas within the meaning of the Department of Industry Act, sixty per cent of such cost; and to authorize payments in those fiscal years to Provinces in respect of previous Municipal Winter Works Incentive Programs, $20,000,000.


RA

Gérard Laprise

Ralliement Créditiste

Mr. Laprise:

Mr. Chairman, as far as vote 6c is concerned, I would like to ask the minister if he has a statement to make about the extension of winter works this spring?

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
LIB

Jean Marchand (Minister of Manpower and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Marchand:

Yes, Mr. Chairman. There will be no extension of the winter works season.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink

Item agreed to. 10c, Grants, Contributions and Subsidies in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the sub-vote titles listed in the Details of the Estimates, $31,750,000. Item agreed to. Immigration- 15c. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, including trans-oceanic and inland transportation and other assistance for immigrants and settlers subject to the approval of Treasury Board, including care en route and while awaiting employment; and payments to the Provinces, pursuant to agreements entered into with the approval of the Governor in Council, in respect of expenses incurred by the Provinces for indigent immigrants, $900,000.


LIB

Ralph Bronson Cowan

Liberal

Mr. Cowan:

I spoke to the Chair earlier and stated I wished to speak on the subject of immigration. I had no comment to make on

the manpower estimates but I have some comments to make on the item before us, 15c.

Those who are interested in the operation of this department know that drastic changes have been made with regard to the treatment of immigrants and would-be immigrants coming into this country. At the present time I am wrapped up in the interests of three men from Greece who are anxious to settle in Canada. Two of them are in the riding of York-Humber at this time. The third returned voluntarily to Greece where he is endeavouring to get back to Canada with landed immigrant status. I must say that this shepherd boy is receiving fine co-operation from the Canadian immigration officers in Athens.

At the moment I am more interested in the two would-be immigrants now living in York-Humber. I have advised the minister more than once that I was anxious to see these supplementary estimates called so that we might discuss a few of the features of the Immigration Act. I have coming up on April 3 a hearing before a special immigration officer in Toronto regarding one would-be Greek immigrant, and on April 9 I have an appearance before the immigration appeal board in Ottawa regarding the second. There are circumstances arising in connection with these cases which I believe apply to the entire immigration department and which need to be straightened out in a hurry.

I am sorry I have not had the opportunity this year of attending the sittings of the special joint committee of the Senate and House of Commons on immigration. I did attend them at some length a year ago and two years ago. Although not a member of the committee I exercised my right as a member of parliament to attend. I believe some fine changes were made in the administration of the act after suggestions put forward by the hon. member for Essex West, the hon. member for Hamilton West and myself. But there are still some snags in the administration of the act which need to be straightened out and I trust hon. members will bear with me while I elucidate.

One of these Greek immigrants came to Canada on a visitor's visa. Everything was in order. His relatives in this country are well able to look after him until he is well established. Of course, there is a ukase to the effect that he cannot accept employment, but he is not protesting against that at all. I shall take first of all the case of a 39 year old would-be immigrant whose people have done so well in this land that they are now living the lives of a retired lady and gentleman,

March 25, 1968

owning considerable property in the borough of York and the city of Toronto.

This man applied for landed immigrant status. What I protest against is the fact that when he was given a hearing by the immigration department no friends were asked to be with him. Then somebody shows up and gives him a written note assessing the kind of immigrant he is likely to be and the kind of man he is likely to be. According to the details set out in the regulations and according to the forms supplied by the Department of Manpower and Immigration, immigrants can sometimes qualify with 35 points, sometimes have to have 40 points and at other times 50 points.

[DOT] (4:10 p.m.)

What I have objected to and objected strenuously, and I do so again now, is the fact that when this man is given his rating and is not given enough points to qualify for landed immigrant status, there is nobody there to advise him and help him. It is almost an examination. In fact it is an examination that he is being given, but he does not realize that he is being given an examination. Then in due course he gets a letter through the mail telling him he has been assigned a certain number of points and that he has not made enough points to qualify for landed immigrant status.

When the would-be landed immigrant receives that notice, having had this first examination against which I protest because it is done in the dark and behind closed doors without any advice being available to the would-be immigrant, he has to leave the country. I hate to use the word deportation. I do not think it should be used by the Department of Immigration. When it tells a man he has to leave the country it does not have to tell him he is being deported, but this is what it does. He has to show up at the deportation office on a certain date and he is deported. When boys in the army overstay their leave they are not called deserters the very next day. They are described as absent without leave. Why don't you call the boys who overstay their leave in the army deserters just as you call these would-be immigrants to Canada deportees the moment someone says they do not have enough marks to qualify to remain in the country?

In the case of this 39-year old Greek, the gentleman with whom I am going to appear before a special inquiry officer on April 3, it does not take a lot of mathematics to subtract 39 from 1968 and find out that he was born in 1929. He came into this country in the month of July or August of last year to visit

DEBATES 8007

Supply-Manpower and Immigration relatives, an aunt, an uncle and cousins. After he had been here a while he thought he would like to remain in the country and he made a formal application to the immigration department to remain. Unknown to his friends, and I call myself a friend of the family, he was given an examination in some office and later he was advised he had not secured enough marks to stay in the country.

In fact this 39-year old man got 24 marks on an examination that requires him to get 50 marks, and he was told that because he got only 24 points he could not stay. He got a letter from the department that I may yet read to the committee. He was told to get out of the country, that he was not wanted and had not got enough marks. He came to see me with his relations who are Canadian citizens well able to look after him. they asked me, "What goes now"? I said, "The only thing we can do now is fight a delaying action. The first thing to do is to enter an appeal to remain in the country."

We entered an appeal to remain in the country and we went before what is known as a special inquiry officer. They use the initials "S.I.O." in the immigration department to cover them. So we go before the special inquiry officer to argue that this gentleman, this 39-year old Greek, a fine looking man, should be allowed to remain in this country. He can be as big a success here as his uncle, aunt and cousins. The special inquiry officer goes through the usual bland questions and he comes to the point that under education and training, where a would-be immigrant can be given a total of up to 20 assigned points, this chap has been given a total of 4. He is 39 years old and under the immigration examination he can be given 20 points under section 1, education and training, one unit to be awarded for each successful year of education or occupational training. This chap was given 4 points by the first officer who examined him.

When the special inquiry officer who, you might say, was hearing the case again-I am not using the word "rehearing"-came to item No. 1 where this chap had been given only four points by a man I have never seen or met, I raised objection and pointed out that this fellow had been given four points on the basis of one point for each year of formal education that he could prove he had in his homeland. This man was born in Greece in 1929 and his people sent him to school when he was about seven years of age, about 1936. The young lad started school in 1936. He was going to school regularly and he was liking

March 25, 1968

8008 COMMONS

Supply-Manpower and Immigration school. But in 1939 his school teacher was drafted into the Greek army because there was some fear of an invasion from the other side of the Adriatic. The young lad did not have a school teacher although he had a schoolhouse. All school teachers were drafted and his education stopped after three and a half years. We will call it four years because he was given four marks.

As there was no school teacher he worked around the farm with his father and the other members of the family. Very shortly, in came the Italians from the west and they burnt the village, they burnt the schoolhouse, and they burnt the boy's home. I asked him where he went when the Italians arrived. I am speaking of the war of 1939 to 1945. He said that his mother and dad took him up into the hills.

After a year or so in the hills they returned to their burned-out village. The lad remembers them rebuilding the place. They put up what you or I would call a ramshackle building because things were uncertain in Greece between 1939 and 1945. There were still no school teachers. They were in the Greek army, if they were still living. Then the partisans came up from the Aegean sea and internal war raged. They burnt the village again, they burnt the boy's home, and again his mother and father took him to the hills. At the meeting with the special inquiry officer I asked this lad, "What did you live in? Tents?" Through the interpreter he said "Tents? We lived in the hills. There were no tents. The army had the tents."

I give you this example of how this lad survived two invasions of his home town. He had no schoolhouse and no school teacher. When he comes to Canada in 1967 the immigration department wants to know why he quit school so early. I told the special inquiry officer that the fact this man had lived through two invasions was proof he was entitled to every mark in the book because he could survive under drastic conditions. How simpler it will be for him to live in Canada and establish his family in Canada when you consider the conditions under which he lived in Greece.

What is going on in the immigration department? I know of an Irish boy who was brought out to Canada in 1939 because there was a likelihood of bombers coming over from Germany to Ireland. This young lad came to Canada and went to school in Canada, but the Greek boy had to stay in Greece. He did not have the money. His schoolhouse was burnt down, his school teacher was in

the Greek army, and his own house was burnt down.

What was the Irish boy doing at that time? He was getting the best education we could give him in all of Canada. He was going to school regularly. No German bombers landed in Ireland or bombed the village from which he came and, lo and behold, in time we gave him a seat in the Senate and he is a great success. He came over the ocean because there was a war in Europe. But when this Greek boy survives the Italian invasion and the war of the partisans we tell him, "You cannot stay because you do not have enough education. You have only four points and you could have 20." Why do we treat with kid gloves the Irish boy who came here in 1939 and remained far from the field of conflict, and then tell this Greek to go back and see how he makes out if the Turks come in should the Canadian army unit be withdrawn from Cyprus?

I have appealed before on behalf of that shepherd boy being allowed to remain in Canada. The immigration department went to the tremendous length of speaking to the Secretary of State for External Affairs last June, and the Secretary of State for External Affairs advised the immigration department that there was now a stable government in Greece. That was terrific. I have a letter here from the immigration department telling me that the Secretary of State for External Affairs says that conditions are fine in Greece, that they are very stable now following the revolution of a year ago. It will be a year ago in April.

But what do we have now in Greece? I have in my hand the Globe and Mail of last Wednesday, March 20. There is a report of a statement made in the House of Commons under the heading "Cyprus Force Likely To Stay, Martin Says". The report reads as follows:

[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)

The three-month extension to June 26 of the United Nations peacekeeping mandate on Cyprus probably will not be the last, External Affairs Minister Paul Martin indicated in the Commons yesterday.

Andrew Brewin (N.D.P., Greenwood) had asked whether, in view of the improved atmosphere on the Mediterranean island, Mr. Martin could say the recent extension would be the last.

Mr. Martin replied that there had been "some improvement" but not such that this would be the last renewal of the mandate.

About 900 Canadians are in the 4,500-man UN Cyprus force.

Now we have Mr. Martin's factual up to the minute statement on conditions in Cyprus. Do not forget that the Turks and the Greeks

March 25. 1968 COMMONS

are facing each other there over a line of demarcation. The immigration department was putting pressure on this shepherd boy. His family thought that if he returned to Greece they could get him back here again more easily than if he stayed and fought with the officials and the appeal board. His Greek relatives in Canada raised the money and it cost them $424 to return the boy. I know their situation. They have a small restaurant.

Last Tuesday morning on the C.B.C. program "Preview Commentary" there was a ten minute commentary by Peter Mellors. We all know that since it was on the C.B.C. it must be true and factual. Mr. Peter Mellors was introduced as a resident of one of the islands of Greece. He gave a very factual rundown of the conditions there. I was interested in this rundown because I was waiting for an opportunity to speak about these two Greeks who wish to remain in Canada.

I wish to thank the C.B.C. for the very prompt co-operation I received in this regard. They gave me the transcript on Friday and I had asked for it on Tuesday morning. Some of you may have been waiting for Max Ferguson and may have missed Peter Mellors. He said:

Nobody outside of Greece can have any idea of the unending flood of propaganda the Greeks have had drummed into them since dawn last April 21st. And in every other socially and economically backward, I should say developed, country the radio is the most powerful means of thought control. It gets right into the homes spreading its insidious message as the children are being got ready for school, as the housewife does her chores, as the husband has the mid-day dinner and as the family gathers in the evening. They might not agree with this, they don't even have to listen to it, but the poison does its work all the same.

The Greek radio has never been anything but the mouthpiece of the party in power.

That is quite different from Canada, you know.

So the colonels are really only following the principles of the despised politicians in offering every hour on the hour an orgy of self-congratulation. The Prime Minister, Mr. Papadopulos, has been inundated with telegrams from the length and breadth of the land praising him for his surprising leniency in extending the recent amnesty to all the regime's political prisoners. Surprising indeed, that the amnesty had extended to about 10 per cent of such prisoners, but that is the sort of details the radio doesn't bother to report. Th same selectivity is used about the U.S. and other nations of the free world. American space achievements are the wonder of the universe, while the Russian efforts in that direction are dismissed with hardly a mention. As for Vietnam, that war has been won by our gallant American allies over and over.

In the grand old democratic days, Greeks could compare what the radio told them with what was in the newspapers. That would be a pointless exer-

DEBATES 8009

Supply-Manpower and Immigration cise now. The newspapers outdo the radio and even vie with each other in piling praise on Mr. Papadopulos and his highminded, patriotic, incorruptible and, of course, tremendously efficient cabinet colleagues. Report control in Greece doesn't end with the radio and the press. Special stamps were issued celebrating the April 21st revolution, stamps were cancelled with slogans extolling the virtues of the national government, as the colonels call themselves.

On the island where I live a big poster has appeared showing a labyrinth, sign-postered with those smears of a democratic society that Greeks were saved from by the national government. Anarchy, corruption, communism, of course, and something called red fascism. Most of the shopkeepers have put the posters up so that it hits you when you walk through the door. One or two,

I have noticed, have tucked it away almost out of sight. It's little things like this that tell you what the Greeks think of their government.

In fact, in spite of all the propaganda, not to mention a few good things the colonels have managed to do, the majority of Greeks seem to be thinking less and less of their rulers. What happens is that people have begun to compare the colonels' promises with their performance and no amount of propaganda can hide the fact that things are getting not better but worse, especially economically.

But what can anybody do? The slightest whisper of discontent lands you in jail. The politicians have been cowed, the army purged, the King kicked out of the country. The colonels meanwhile continue on their merry way buoyed up, one can only assume, by their own propaganda.

That report was broadcast on the C.B.C. network as recently as last Tuesday morning. This gentleman whose comments I accept as being factual, and who spoke on the C.B.C. over a broad network, said that things in Greece are getting not better but worse, especially economically. There was a revolution in Greece in April of last year.

I should like now to refer to the revolution in Cuba of six years ago. You may have read about the 24-year old Cuban girl who was in Vancouver taking part in a gymnastic competition. One might say that she jumped ship. When it was time to return to her country she could not be found. The Cuban people on the team could not find her and returned to their country. The girl showed up a couple of days later in Vancouver. Shortly after I asked the Minister of Manpower and Immigration in the House what action the department intended taking with regard to this Cuban girl whom I have never met and know nothing about. He informed me that he did not have the details but would advise me further the next day. The next day he showed me a detailed statement he had received from the deputy minister of manpower and immigration in which the facts were given about the

March 25, 1968

8010 COMMONS

Supply-Manpower and Immigration girl who had disappeared and was found again in Vancouver.

This girl was applying for political asylum against the Castro revolution of six or seven years ago. She was 24 years old. Since then the Minister of Manpower and Immigration has been his usual gracious self and has inquired into this matter in detail. He told me that he felt inclined to give the girl political asylum from the revolution in Cuba. I told him I thought that was the proper stand to take and congratulated him on it. He told me that in a few days some formal action would be taken. On Friday last the Minister of Manpower and Immigration advised me that a special order in council was going to be passed by the cabinet to grant this Cuban girl in Vancouver political asylum. I congratulated him and told him that he could not pass the special order in council too soon to please me. This situation pertains to a revolution of six years ago in Cuba. I am speaking of a revolution which took place as recently as last April.

That Greek who last summer did not want to return to Greece because of the revolution was told that everything was stable in Greece. I pointed out that things were stable in Paris between 1941 and 1944 under the heel of Hitler. There is no reason that we should play favourites with a Cuban girl with regard to a revolution six or seven years ago and give different treatment in respect of a revolution only 11 months old.

[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)

These Greek men do not want to return to Greece because war could break out there at any time, particularly in view of the situation in Cyprus. We have the assurance given to the Social Credit members some years ago, and I was in the house at the time, that if fighting breaks out in Cyprus the Canadian troops will be withdrawn immediately. We keep the peace as long as there is peace but when it is likely there will be a war we withdraw our peacekeeping troops, as shown by the Suez situation. The same thing will happen in Cyprus because the Social Credit members have the assurance that if fighting breaks out in Cyprus between the Greeks and the Turks the Canadian troops will be withdrawn right smartly.

Why should we send these Greeks back to Greece at this time when they might become involved in a war? They want to escape that possibility. This 39-year old man is married and has three children he wants to bring out to this country where his relatives can quite

ably look after them. He has been told that although he may have survived the Italian campaign and the partisan campaign, he is not too smart and has only received four points for education. What does it matter that his school teacher was drafted? What does it matter that the schoolhouse was burned down? What does it matter to us that he was only 16 years old when the war was over? That is apparently of no interest to the immigration department because he has only four points for education.

In my riding of York-Humber there is a man who asked for landed immigrant status, having come here from Australia. The immigration people in Toronto went over him with a fine-tooth comb. I do not know what marks they gave him but he did receive a letter telling him that he had to get out of the country, that he was going to be deported. They again used this word "deported" which means to me Botany bay for the English and Devil's island for the French. We are still using this word "deported".

This young chap is 23. Individuals of this type never come to me until they receive these deportation letters. That is the first I ever heard from him. This young lad asked me for assistance so he could remain in Canada. I asked him why he had waited until the stable door was shut-it is not locked but it is certainly shut-before he came. I said that I would see what I could do and I made inquiries about this 23-year-old lad from Australia. I found out that he apparently lived until age 16 in a central European country. When he was 16 his father decided there were better prospects for himself and his boy in Australia. They moved to Australia seven years ago. The father took up hairdressing down there and this boy learned the trade along with him and became very proficient at it. This young man today lives within 300 yards of my home.

This young man asked me if I could assist him to remain in Canada. I asked this proficient hairdresser whether he had told the immigration department that he was an Australian citizen. I asked him if he was actually an Australian citizen. He said that the moment his five years were up he took out Australian citizenship. I asked him whether he had told the immigration department of this fact. He said he did not know whether he had done so. He said that he had come from Sydney and that they should know he was Australian. He said he did not know whether he had mentioned his Australian citizenship. I

March 25, 1968

asked him to let me see his certificate. We went up to the place where he was rooming and he went into the bedroom and produced his certificate. It is really something. It has the Union Jack on it in red, white and blue, the Queen's picture, Australian leaves and everything else. This grants him Australian citizenship. He is an Australian citizen sworn before the deputy mayor of Sydney, Australia.

At this point I said to him that as far as I was aware we had not started deporting Australians yet and I told him I would go to see the immigration people the next morning. I went to the immigration department in Toronto and told them the facts of the matter as I have related them to you. I asked how many Australians we had deported in recent years. They could not recall deporting any Australians recently but they got on the phone and to my surprise-

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
?

@Deputy Chair(man)? of Committees of the Whole

Order. I regret to interrupt the hon. member but the time allotted to him has now expired.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
NDP

David Lewis (Parliamentary Leader of the N.D.P.)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Lewis:

Mr. Chairman, I have no intention of speaking for very long but certainly-

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
PC

Robert Jardine McCleave

Progressive Conservative

Mr. McCleave:

Let the hon. member

continue.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
NDP

David Lewis (Parliamentary Leader of the N.D.P.)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Lewis:

If members of the committee would like to give the hon. member for York-Humber an opportunity to complete his speech I would be very pleased to sit down and rise after he has done so.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
?

@Deputy Chair(man)? of Committees of the Whole

Does the committee give unanimous consent to the hon. member to complete his remarks?

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Agreed.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
LIB

Ralph Bronson Cowan

Liberal

Mr. Cowan:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wish to thank hon. members for their cooperation. As we are in committee of the whole I was relying on having a break in my time so I could resume speaking later. If the committee wishes to give me unanimous consent to continue now I will do so. I thank the hon. member for York South for his co-operation.

As this chap from central Europe was an Australian citizen I went to the immigration people and informed them that they were deporting an Australian citizen. As this was something brand new to me I asked how many Australian citizens had been deported in the last 18 months. They replied that there had been very few deported, if any. I was

DEBATES 8011

Supply-Manpower and Immigration very glad to hear that. In any event they made a telephone call and after a lot of whispered conversation I was advised that because of a shortage of hairdressers in Toronto they were going to allow this Australian to remain in Toronto. They filled out the necessary papers and everybody was happy.

It was about this time that I realized what was going on. This central European is single. He had left his homeland to go to Australia with his father seven years ago. He learned his trade in Australia and became very proficient. In 1967 he came to Canada alone without his father. The father would be somewhere between 50 and 60 years of age. One must realize that there is conscription in Australia of Australian and British subjects for the Viet Nam war. We do not have conscription in Canada for the Viet Nam war or for any other war. Here was this Australian citizen who had been seven years resident in Australia. After five years residence in Australia he took out his Australian citizenship. He has his Australian citizenship and now he is a safely landed immigrant in the Dominion of Canada.

[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)

What about the Greek? He does not want to go back to the revolution in Greece, but what does the immigration department care about him? We are only protecting those people who do not want to be conscripted for the war in Viet Nam. We may be a homeland for draft dodgers from the United States, but that is another matter. I am speaking now about an Australian citizen to whom the immigration department gave the status of a landed immigrant because there is a shortage of hairdressers in Toronto. Evidently there is no shortage of restaurant workers because the officials of the immigration department are telling Greeks to go back home. If a war breaks out with Turkey we will pull out our Canadian troops in Cyprus, but we will want someone to stand up to the Turks and the Greek people who come over here look like good cannon fodder.

I do not see how we can refuse this 39-year old Greek admission to this country on the basis of the number of points he gets. I have not been able to attend meetings of the immigration committee. However, I saw accounts of these meetings in the newspapers and I discussed some of the hearings with the hon. member for Cartier who was one of the joint chairmen of the committee. Miss Scott,

March 25, 1968

8012 COMMONS

Supply-Manpower and Immigration the newly appointed chairman of the immigration appeal board, testified before the committee. I know the hon. member for Cartier questioned her rather closely on this point. He asked whether the immigration appeal board can reverse or upset the points score given by the first immigration inquiry to the would-be immigrant. Miss Scott said no, the points system cannot be reversed. She said they can only work on the grounds of humanitarianism as the facts are presented to them.

I should like to put a question to the Minister of Manpower and Immigration, who in my opinion is doing a fine job. I am not saying this because I am asking now for special consideration. My requests for consideration have never been turned down, with the exception of the case of the Greek shepherd. I cannot understand why the Greek to whom I referred a while ago is not considered to be admissable and yet there are thousands of Greeks in Toronto who have established themselves securely there. The Greek shepherd boy is in Greece now but there are two other Greeks in York-Humber who are requesting landed immigrant status at the present time. However, Miss Scott said there is no use going before the immigration appeal board because the points score cannot be reversed. This fellow was given 24 points out of the 45 or 50 which he is supposed to have. He did not have much schooling so he cannot get marks under that heading. At the first hearing of the special inquiry I let the inquiry officer know what I thought of the treatment given the Irish boy who fled from the European wars and became a senator, while we tell these Greek boys who went through the second world war and a revolution at home to go back home.

The inquiry officer at that point said he would like to adjourn the hearing, to which I agreed. Now my Greek friend has received a second call to appear before the inquiry officer on the morning of April 3, and he received a letter asking him to bring his educational certificates with him. I hope they are in French and English because this fellow went to school for only three and a half years, and no doubt his instructors in Greece thought the immigration department in Canada would want to see the certificates in the future when he was 39 years of age. I wonder how many boys who went through two invasions of upper Greece in the last war have their education papers ready for presentation

to the special inquiry officer of the immigration department in Toronto. I will not bet any money on that, and this Greek fellow does not have such certificates. We have to take his word that he had about three and a half years of education before his teacher was drafted.

May I say to the minister, with all the feeling I can muster, that these men should not be given marks at a secret hearing and then be told later by the special inquiry officer that he does not have the power to change the decision on the number of points the man first received. In the case of the man to whom I referred, he was examined by somebody or other in Toronto for the duration of 20 minutes. During that time the telephone rang and the officer who was supposed to be examining him spoke over the telephone for six minutes on the subject of the employment of another immigrant somewhere in Toronto. So the man who was being examined was only given 14 minutes, at the end of which the inquiry officer decided to give him 24 points. We have such a clever immigration judge in Toronto that he was able to pass judgment and make a decision affecting the future life of this 39-year old man, his wife and three boys living in Greece after an examination lasting only 14 minutes as the result of which he gave the man 24 points out of the necessary 50. As a result this man cannot remain in this country, although his uncles and his aunts have established themselves successfully over here.

Why were other people not allowed to be present at the hearing so that the applicant could have received full credit for the conditions under which he had lived? Up to 15 points are given for the applicants, adaptability, motivation, initiative, and other similar qualities as they are assessed by the immigration officer. Yet this 39-year old Greek who went through two wars as a child, which showed some adaptability, motivation and initiative, was given by this wise examiner in Toronto 6 points out of 15. I wonder whether the special inquiry immigration officer would have survived the first invasion, let alone the second. The all-important examination in these cases is the first one. The special immigration officer admitted he cannot do anything to change the first decision on the points system, and so did the chairman of the immigration appeal board. She said she can only act on humanitarian grounds.

March 25, 1968

We know that under the new rules the minister does not have the authority to change or to supersede the final decision of the appeal board. The two Greek cases I have mentioned have not yet been before the appeal board under the new rules. I appeared before the immigration appeal board on two separate occasions. One involved a gentleman from Jamaica and the other involved a gentleman from Italy. The appeal board found against the applicants. I took the matter up with the minister of immigration and citizenship who in those days had the authority and who granted special permits to the Italian and the Jamaican. The two of them are now well established in Toronto, and their families are here with them. If anyone wished to look up the official government record he would find that it still says the applicants must leave the country. I took the matter up with the minister, a man with a big heart and with compassion, and he granted these two men special permits to stay. If I were to bring the case before a special immigration board now there would be no appeal.

In the case of the Greek fellow we could file an application for political asylum from the Greek revolution. If the little girl in Vancouver could escape from Cuba to Canada by a special order in council of the cabinet giving her political asylum in this country, then these two Greeks should not have to go before the special inquiry officer on April 3 and before the immigration appeal board on April 9. These men are trying to get away from the rule of a military junta which is controlling Greece today, particularly in view of what was said by the Secretary of State for External Affairs last week, and in view of what the C.B.C. reported as recently as last Tuesday morning.

I suggest to the minister that when the first hearing is held the relatives of the applicant be advised that this is the all-important hearing and that they should be present at it and bring their counsel if they wish so that the applicant will have the best chance of receiving the largest total number of points possible. If he is going to be examined behind a closed door the decision reached will be an anchor round his neck when he goes before a special inquiry officer to appeal the first decision. As we know, there is no use appealing because the anchor around his neck will drown him from the first hearing. I say to the minister, there must be a change in this regard.

I have here in my hands four recent copies of the New Statesman and Nation, the most

DEBATES 8013

Supply-Manpower and Immigration recent ones to have come from London. Each of them contains an article on the situation in Greece which points out that democracy in that country is dead. How in the name of heaven can we give political asylum to a girl from Cuba where the revolution is six years old and not give asylum to these would-be immigrants from Greece who have paid their way over here and who have relatives here to look after them? Why should we have to go through the rigmarole of a special inquiry and a hearing before the appeal board? Can the minister give me an answer?

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
NDP

David Lewis (Parliamentary Leader of the N.D.P.)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Lewis:

Mr. Chairman, when I rose earlier I said I would not speak as long as the hon. member for York-Humber. I can say now quite definitely that I certainly will not. I have two or three brief remarks for the attention of the minister and the officials of his department. But before I make them I want to express my appreciation of the careful and considerate way in which the officials of the minister's department have always dealt with any matter I have brought to their attention, and I have had many of them.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
NDP

David Lewis (Parliamentary Leader of the N.D.P.)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Lewis:

There is a large number of new Canadians in my constituency, particularly of Italian origin, and therefore I have had many dealings with the department. I am personally grateful to the minister's officials, on behalf of these people and indeed on behalf of the people of Canada, for the very intelligent, gracious and helpful way in which they have dealt with these cases. As a matter of fact, I have not had occasion to go to the minister himself or even to the deputy minister more than once or twice because the officials of the department were either able to give my appeal favourable consideration or else were able to persuade me that their rejection of it was based on unobjectionable grounds.

I am very concerned about the tests given to applicants. I appreciate the fact that when the minister and his department prepared these tests for applicants they tried to arrive at a much more objective set of questions than had previously been the case. I do not object to the intention or the objective which they set for themselves, but the tests have always worried me. It has always worried me that a person who gets 35 points has a passing score and the person who gets 33 points fails. The lower mark might easily be the result of a particular characteristic of the officer who

March 25, 1968

Supply-Manpower and Immigration is interviewing the applicant. It always worried me at school as well as at university and it worries me now when my children are going through school.

[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)

I have often wondered how a professor of English can say that an essay is worth 74 marks and not 75 marks when 75 would have given the youngster first class honours while 74 gives him second class. This is all right for an essay which does not matter very much, but it matters a great deal to an applicant. It matters a great deal to the person who is seeking to remain in Canada or to come to Canada. If because the examining officer has a certain attitude, was bitten by something or was abused by someone an hour before the examination takes place, his response to the applicant is different from what it might otherwise have been and the applicant loses, then I suggest to the minister he consider the possibility of rechecking so that the matter is not left to the judgment of one officer.

I appreciate that this would increase the load of work. In view of the large number of applications with which the department has to deal it may well be that this is not a practical suggestion. I really do not know. I am being frank and honest with the minister when I say this. However, I am worried as a result of the experience I have had about leaving the decision in the hands of one officer in a one-shot interview, which is generally the case. One officer, in a one-shot interview, may be fallible and is, may make errors and does. The only way I can see to overcome that is either by regular rechecking, automatic rechecking by another officer or, alternatively, rechecking at the request of the applicant or someone connected with him. This will not give perfection either. I appreciate that you can never arrive at perfection.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
PC

Gordon Drummond Clancy

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Clancy:

Will the hon. member allow a question? What does he mean by old Canadian and new Canadian?

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
NDP

David Lewis (Parliamentary Leader of the N.D.P.)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Lewis:

I was not aware-

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
PC

Gordon Drummond Clancy

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Clancy:

Define it. Put it on the record.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
NDP

David Lewis (Parliamentary Leader of the N.D.P.)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Lewis:

I was not aware I was speaking about that at all, Mr. Chairman. May I continue? I appreciate that even a recheck will not bring perfection, but at least if you had two officers independently agreeing on a situation you would have a much closer approximation to justice than you have now.

Another point I wanted to draw to the minister's attention is the difference between a person who comes to Canada as a tourist and applies for immigrant status while he is here, and a person who makes application in his own country. If he comes as a tourist and makes application while in Canada, eventually he has access to the appeal board. The new appeal legislation gives the appeal board not only permission but authority-I would suggest almost a direction-to take humanitarian and compassionate grounds into consideration. When an applicant has not met the test on the number of points required he is able to go before the appeal board, either himself or through someone else, and present a case on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. However, a person who makes application in Rome or, as in one of the most recent cases to come to my attention, makes application in London, does not have access to the appeal board in Canada. It is impossible for the higher officers in Ottawa to recheck the application. If he is rejected as a result of the one-shot examination over there, then really he is through except that he may start over again and keep pressing at this end. Therefore it seems to me, that unless something has happened of which I am not aware, and that could easily take place, the point system has to be changed or a difference should be made to take cognizance of this fact.

There is a case I have in mind of a person who has a very old aunt here who cannot nominate him for various reasons. She does not have enough income or she does not believe she can live as long as the five-year guarantee requires. He has no closer relatives except a large number of cousins in Canada who are very anxious to help him become established in this country and are able to do so. He makes application overseas without sponsorship as an independent applicant. He has to meet, if I remember correctly, roughly 50 points if he is an independent applicant. He does not quite meet that test. I do not yet have the information, and I am not at all sure whether I will get it, as to what points he did reach. He is through, except that I will probably be landing the case on the minister's desk because the information I have persuades me that this person ought to be admitted.

The minister may want to give the case favourable consideration, but he is in a spot. He cannot see the applicant because he is overseas. He can only go by the record in the file and presumably the record will show that

March 25. 1968

this fellow lacks sufficient points in education, in training or in skills. Perhaps the officer who examined him thought that in the personal initiative category he was entitled to only 5 points out of 15. Perhaps he did not come within the category in which there may be a job for him. The minister, if he is to change the decision, will have to have a great deal more information than I may well be able to give to him.

Like all other hon members, I have some uneasiness about asking the minister or any one of his officers to make a special case without some valid argument. If the man were over here these valid arguments might be present but they are not in my hands to bring to the minister. It seems to me that since a person who makes application outside the country cannot have available to him the final appeal on humanitarian and compassionate grounds to the appeal board which someone who is resident here can have, the department should give very serious consideration to the possibility of varying the requirements. Perhaps they could be rearranged so that more weight would be given to one aspect than another to meet this situation.

I have raised two points which I hope will be helpful. Certainly they are concrete. It seems to me they are at the basis of immigration selection because the selection is now based on an objective test. I have said already that the officers certainly do their best but there were these two points that I wanted to bring to the minister's attention.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I want to say a brief word about something that does not fall directly under these estimates. I will not take more than two minutes to do it, if that long. The subject is related to these estimates. When we bring immigrants into Canada we have to be concerned about the facilities available for them to become citizens. The more I deal with Canadians who have recently come to this country, the more I am impressed by the fact that a relatively small proportion of those who have lived here the required length of time become citizens. At every election, whether federal or provincial, when I finally see the voters' list for my riding I am astonished and discouraged by the fact that not only not all but I would say less than half of those who could be citizens as a result of the length of time they have been in this country are in fact citizens. And, Mr. Chairman, for the most part they want to be. I have talked to them and been given to understand that they feel they are not getting

Supply-Manpower and Immigration the opportunity to become citizens as a result of the requirements of the citizenship courts, the tests to which they are put, and the fact that they have to lose money by being off work when they are trying to save every penny they can.

[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)

I will not say anything else on this subject because I appreciate that it is not in order, but I would appeal to the minister of immigration, who is concerned about those whom his department assists and admits to Canada, that he do all he can to change the manner in which persons make application for citizenship and are tested for that purpose. I do not know whether the minister will take time to deal with the points I have raised; I am not at all sure he would want to at this stage. However, I hope his department will pay serious attention to the suggestions I have made, not because I make them but because from my experience they seem to be matters deserving attention.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink
LIB

Georges-C. Lachance

Liberal

Mr. Lachance:

Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words at this stage.

I think that all members of the house have already joined in the tokens of sympathy expressed throughout the world towards the victims of the terrible earthquake which occurred in Sicily recently.

I know that the Minister of Manpower and Immigration (Mr. Marchand) has already assured the house that special arrangements would be made to make it easier for the greatest number possible of those victims to immigrate to Canada and settle here.

A great number of the electors of the Lafontaine riding that I represent in this house are of Italian origin. They are building great hopes on the special arrangements announced by the minister some time ago. But time goes by and results seem to be long in coming. Can the hon. member give us some details on the results of the special steps which were taken by his department in that instance?

In addition, Mr. Chairman, I should like to point out, as other members have done I am sure, that a large number of citizens who have immigrated to Canada in the last 10, 20 and 25 years have never asked to become Canadian citizens. That problem probably falls within the jurisdiction of the immigration service, but I wonder if the hon. minister might not be able to tell us something in this regard.

March 25, 1968

8016 COMMONS

Supply-Manpower and Immigration

Recently, an immigrant, who was on the point of being married, needed a passport to go abroad, as he had lost the passport of his country of origin, and he could not obtain a new one within a reasonable period of time because the town where he was born had been destroyed during the war. Naturally, because he was on the point of being married, he was told that he would have to make an application and wait for months before getting his Canadian citizenship.

I wonder whether, in such cases, it might not be advisable to intensify our efforts with a view to encouraging the immigrants who have been in Canada for quite some time to become Canadian citizens.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION
Permalink

March 25, 1968