With reference to your letter of December 30th† regarding the forthcoming Conference on Passport and Frontier Formalities, in which my comments are invited on the proposed instructions for the guidance of the Canadian delegate to the Conference, I would point out that at the meeting held on December 10th to discuss matters on the agenda for the meeting of Experts, the representative of this Branch fully explained the situation that existed and brought about present immigration visé regulations incorporated in P.C. 3016. These regulations were put into effect because of the large number of inadmissible alien immigrants entering Canada as visitors and either remaining illegally or, subsequent to admission, applying for permanent landing. It was found impracticable to properly examine these people on arrival at a Canadian port of entry and that a strict application of the law would result in lengthy detentions at the port of arrival and a large number of rejections and deportations or, alternatively, the admission by misrepresentation of many inadmissible persons.

Since the cessation of hostilities and prior to the re-establishment of our officers in Europe, there have been many cases of this type developed.

In view of the present situation in Europe, this would seem to be a most inopportune time to withdraw visé control and such action would inevitably aggravate the problem that existed prior to the establishment of our present visé requirements. Therefore, we are not in agreement with the abolition of the visé requirements for non-immigrants as called for by the regulations under P.C. 3016.

With regard to the question of deportation, we think it would be quite impracticable to provide that the cost of deportation should be borne by the country issuing the passport. Under Canadian law persons ordered deported must be returned by the transportation company bringing them to Canada, except where deportation proceedings are instituted five years after entry. The actual expenditure of funds by the transportation company in carrying out deportation is negligible, as the moving of the deport does not involve any expenses for additional transportation facilities.

The question of registration of all aliens in Canada is primarily not one for the consideration of this Service but we very much doubt whether there would be justification for this step.

While we would very much like to have a representative of this Service attend the Conference, we find, with our present activities, it will be impossible to have an officer available to attend the Conference.

A.R. JOLLIFFE