{"id":139068,"date":"2017-12-14T02:56:35","date_gmt":"2017-12-14T07:56:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=139068"},"modified":"2017-12-14T02:56:35","modified_gmt":"2017-12-14T07:56:35","slug":"house-of-commons-report-calls-on-ircc-to-repeal-excessive-demand-rules","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2017\/12\/14\/house-of-commons-report-calls-on-ircc-to-repeal-excessive-demand-rules\/","title":{"rendered":"House of Commons report calls on IRCC to repeal \u2018excessive demand\u2019 rules"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Photo:<\/a>
Photo: CIC News<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

A Parliamentary committee is recommending the repeal of a controversial section of Canada\u2019s\u00a0Immigration and Refugee Protection Act<\/em>\u00a0that refuses entry to immigrants deemed likely to cause \u201cexcessive demand\u201d on the country\u2019s healthcare system.<\/p>\n

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration held hearings over the last few weeks on the Act\u2019s\u00a0medical inadmissibility provisions<\/a>, and Section 38-1C in particular.<\/p>\n

Under that section, a\u00a0prospective immigrant can be ruled inadmissible on health grounds if their health condition \u201cmight reasonably be expected to cause excessive demand on health or social services.\u201d<\/p>\n

Excessive demand is defined as one \u201cfor which the anticipated costs would likely exceed average Canadian per capita health services and social services\u201d over a five or 10-year period, or which would exacerbate existing wait times for health and social services in Canada.<\/p>\n

In 2017, the cost threshold for a demand to be considered excessive was\u00a0$6,655 per year, or $33,275 over five years.<\/p>\n

In a report on the hearings released Dec. 12, the standing committee said Section 38-1C \u201cis out of touch with Canadian values\u201d and at odds with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which Canada ratified in 2010.<\/p>\n

As long as the provision remains in Canada\u2019s\u00a0\u00a0Immigration and Refugee Protection Act,\u00a0<\/em>the report says, \u201cour immigration laws unjustifiably violate human rights of certain would-be newcomers to Canada and this is inconsistent with the modern values Canadians associate with contemporary human rights protections.\u201d<\/p>\n

The standing committee\u2019s five recommendations begin with the full repeal of Section 38-1C\u00a0 along with its exemptions and all corresponding regulations from the\u00a0Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.\u00a0<\/em>This first recommendation also calls on Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to repeal all corresponding policies and guidelines associated with Section 38-1C.<\/p>\n

Review of excessive demand \u2018necessary and long overdue\u2019<\/h3>\n

In an appearance before the committee on Nov. 23<\/a>, Canada\u2019s Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen said \u201call options were on the table\u201d with regard to the excessive demand provision, including its repeal.<\/p>\n

In his remarks, Hussen said a review of the provision was \u201cnecessary and long overdue,\u201d noting that it was more than 40 years old and had to be brought into the 21st century.<\/p>\n

\u201cFrom a principled perspective, the current excessive demand provision simply does not align with our country\u2019s values and the inclusion of persons with disabilities in Canadian society,\u201d Hussen told the committee.<\/p>\n

Hussen said IRCC was consulting with Canada\u2019s provincial and territorial governments in order to determine the way forward on Section 38-1C.<\/p>\n

Recognizing that a full repeal could take time, the committee recommended a number of interim measures to improve the application of the excessive demand as long as it remains on the books.<\/p>\n

Those interim measures include:<\/p>\n