Skip to main content

Seidu Mohammed told MPs on the finance committee Thursday morning that the bill 'would put a lot of people at risk.'

JOHN WOODS/THE CANADIAN PRESS

A refugee from Ghana who lost all his fingers to frostbite crossing irregularly into Canada made an impassioned plea to MPs on Thursday to scrap proposed new asylum-seeker rules the Liberals want to turn into law.

Seidu Mohammed’s story of crossing a snow-covered field between North Dakota and Manitoba focused attention on the border in December, 2016 – a reason he was asked to testify before the House of Commons finance committee as it studied the proposal in the Liberals’ budget bill.

He avoided official border checkpoints in order to make a refugee claim in Canada after being denied in the United States.

Story continues below advertisement

The Liberals want to change refugee laws to prevent asylum-seekers from making claims in Canada if they have made claims in certain countries, including the United States – a move Border Security Minister Bill Blair says is meant to prevent “asylum-shopping.”

Mr. Mohammed said the rules would likely have barred his ultimately successful application if they had been in place two-and-a-half years ago. He told the committee he likely would been sent back to the United States where he would have been locked up and possibly sent back his home country.

“Deporting me back to Ghana would destroy my life. I would be imprisoned or tortured to death,” he told the committee. “I don’t want this to happen to anybody.”

The Liberals’ budget bill, as worded, would put more people at risk and shouldn’t be passed, he said.

“I’m pleading with you guys, this bill should not be passed.”

The new rules introduced last month in the government’s omnibus budget bill have become a political lightening rod for the Liberals as they face pressure from the Conservatives to better manage the border, calls from New Democrats to drop the asylum-seeker changes and charges from lawyers and advocates who decry the rules as a devastating attack on refugee rights in Canada.

As multiple House of Commons committee hold hearings on the proposed rules, the government is also facing politically-charged requests from the country’s most populous province for more federal money.

Story continues below advertisement

Many of the more than 42,000 asylum-seekers have crossed into Canada “irregularly” through unofficial paths along the Canada-U.S. border since early 2017 have found their way to Toronto, Ottawa and other parts of Ontario to await the outcomes of their refugee claims, which could take up to two years because of an increasing backlog of cases.

To handle the costs of housing and services for those claimants, the federal government has given Toronto alone $71-million, with a further $7-million to Ottawa’s municipal government. Lisa MacLeod, Ontario’s minister responsible for immigration, renewed her demands on Thursday for the federal government to pony up $200-million she says the feds owe the province for asylum costs.

“The meagre amount of support that they have provided to our two largest municipalities falls tens of millions of dollars short. It does not cover any of the education costs, which is $20-million, it does not cover any of the social assistance costs, which is $90-million, and it falls far short for our major municipalities,” she said.

Ms. MacLeod argued that the federal government has sole jurisdiction over refugee resettlement and should provide the province – not just some cities – with compensation for the millions in costs incurred.

Mr. Blair pinned the blame back on the Ontario government, telling reporters the Ford government refuses to negotiate directly with the federal government, which is why his department has instead been going directly to cities such as Toronto and Ottawa for funding arrangements.

“Historically when people came to Ontario seeking refuge … municipalities have stood together and worked together to provide the necessary supports,” Mr. Blair said.

Story continues below advertisement

“Unfortunately the province of Ontario has chosen to abrogate their responsibilities and step out of that role, but the job still needs to be done.”

Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter
To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies