Almost half of Toronto’s community agencies ask for clients’ immigration status, and 30 per cent say they would share the information with police and immigration officials.

Those statistics are from a new city-funded report, the first ever to survey community service agencies about their policies on serving “non-status residents” — a growing population of migrants who are in Canada without immigration status.

More than one-third of the participating agencies said they did not know or were uncertain about their legal rights and obligations if approached by law or immigration enforcement inquiring about a client. Some 71 per cent said they did not have a formal policy about serving this population.

“With our federal immigration polices geared towards temporary residents, making it harder for people to gain permanent status, how to serve non-status residents will continue to be a growing issue,” said report author Navjeet Sidhu, of Social Planning Toronto, which conducted the survey.

The 32-page report will be released Tuesday, as Toronto City Council is reviewing its municipally funded services in a bid to ensure they’re available to all residents, “legal” or not. In February, Toronto was declared to be Canada’s first “sanctuary city” for migrants without status.

Sidhu said non-status residents in Toronto face barriers in accessing critical legal, housing, health and employment services — a factor that puts them at greater risk of poverty and poor health and makes them especially vulnerable to abuse and exploitation.

It’s thought there are somewhere between 100,000 and 250,000 undocumented migrants in Greater Toronto, but the number is expected to surge in 2015 when four-year work permits for thousands of temporary foreign workers who have moved to Canada legally begin to expire under a 2011 federal law, potentially moving thousands more “underground.”

Deena Ladd, executive director of Toronto’s Workers’ Action Centre, said the agency, funded by the city and other private foundations, never inquires into a client’s immigration status.

“Privacy is very important. Our clients are already dealing with all kinds of issues . . . humiliation and discrimination by employers. They need to feel this is a place where their privacy and confidentiality are respected,” said Ladd.

“We do not collect info on status. There is no information for border service agents to collect. That’s the reason why other agencies should not be asking for clients’ status, so they don’t set themselves up for that.”

The centre’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was a big factor in why Angie, a Jamaican who has lived in Toronto under the radar for 18 years, was willing to come forward and lodge a complaint against her former employer, who she claims owes her two months of wages — about $3,600 — as a live-in servant.

“I’ve worked for the family for four months. My employer knew I didn’t have papers. In May, she called the police to turn me in because she didn’t want to pay me,” said Angie, 52, who asked that her last name not be used to protect her from authorities.

“I left just with the clothes on me. I was afraid to get help,” she added. Angie has been in the city a long time; she said came to Toronto in 1995 via New York, to join her long-lost father here.

According to the Social Planning Toronto report, 44 per cent of the 101 agencies surveyed said they would inquire into a client’s status to determine eligibility for government-funded language, employment or settlement programs, to fill out forms and applications, to assess their needs, or for statistical purposes.

The ID they might ask for include a birth certificate, a social insurance card, refugee papers, a passport, a permanent residency card, a work permit and driver’s licence.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Thirty per cent of the agencies said they would share information about clients’ immigration status with police, border and immigration officials, while half indicated they would only do so with the Children’s Aid Society.

While only one-quarter of the agencies had adopted a formal policy for serving the undocumented, more than two-thirds of those without such a policy said they would like help to develop one.