:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, honourable members.
Over a month ago I was pleased to outline the challenges before this government and this committee of Parliament in terms of welcoming newcomers to Canada.
[Translation]
I sincerely welcome my second my opportunity to appear before this committee and once again seek your help and guidance in meeting these challenges.
[English]
A major step toward that goal is to review with you the changes in the department's main estimates since last year and to seek your support for this funding.
Before we address those changes, I would like to perhaps outline my goal for Citizenship and Immigration Canada. I believe that working in partnership we can substantially improve the process we use to attract and to provide services to those who choose Canada as their new home.
I will see that the department improves the efficiency of our programs and operations. We will demonstrate to new immigrants that our policies present and promote opportunities for a new life. I assure all members that fairness will always be a fundamental principle that guides our responses to the often desperate plight of legitimate refugees and their families.
I believe the discussion of these main estimates presents all of us with a unique opportunity to truly work together in the best interests and spirit of our parliamentary democracy and to demonstrate to those contemplating becoming new Canadians that we are worthy of their choice and trust.
[Translation]
Immigration is about the future of our country.
[English]
A well-managed and welcoming immigration system contributes greatly to our demography, to our economy, and to our social and cultural diversity by making Canada a sound socio-cultural model for the rest of the world to admire. Yet settlement services funding was frozen in 1996. As the levels were increased in the late 1990s and in the early years in this decade, resources were stretched even further. It's no surprise the provinces were desperate for resources.
This is why we are focusing much of our attention and our financial resources on the issue of integration. A well-managed immigration system should be able to welcome immigrants quickly and help them succeed.
You will note that we have dedicated resources toward this goal. In fact, let me make it quite clear that this year we are working toward reaching a high end of the government's planning range for admitting newcomers, which, as you know, is around 255 persons. We feel this is good for Canada, and in fact this intake will help address the labour shortages we are facing.
As I have said, the goal of this government is not merely to land a planned number of immigrants; it is to focus on outcomes and to ensure that every newcomer has a good start. This government will work to ensure immigrants are supported in their efforts to adapt and become contributors to our society.
Research shows that at the beginning of the 1980s, two-thirds--66%--of skilled workers earned more than the Canadian average income one year after their arrival. By 1996 that had fallen to just 4% of newcomers earning more than native-born Canadians one year after their arrival. This is a loss both to the individuals and to their families, and to Canada as a whole.
[Translation]
We simply have to do a better job of ensuring that our new citizens land on their feet when they get here.
[English]
This is also why the government is seriously looking into how to best recognize and utilize foreign credentials. We've all heard the stories of engineers and doctors driving taxis even when there is an acute demand for precisely their skills and experience. Canada can do better, and it will. We have committed $18 million to the 2006 budget to take on this issue. The money will help us work with our provincial partners toward the creation of a new agency that will support the assessment and recognition of foreign credentials. I will speak more of this initiative later in my remarks.
Members can appreciate and recognize that a government's main estimates are by their very nature very broad outlines of a government's funding intentions in support of stated and agreed policies over a period of one year. I wish to be transparent and accountable. I am eager to answer your questions about what is in the main estimates to the best of my ability, and I am prepared to address your questions about items you may have expected to see here but that are anticipated for the fall supplements.
Let me begin by giving you the big picture of the overall expenditures. Then I will break down the changes so that you will be able to see where the principal ones have occurred.
Under item 1, members will note that Citizenship and Immigration Canada's main estimates for 2006-07 are $1.2268 billion, a net increase of $392.9 million from the previous fiscal year. I would ask committee members to note that individual items, items that I understand could be of a direct and deep interest, are not displayed separately in the main estimates, with the exception of grants and contributions.
Under item 1, resources related to the Toronto waterfront revitalization initiative—more commonly known as the TWRI—in the amount of $115.8 million, will be transferred to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat in the 2006-07 supplementary estimates as a result of the change in responsibility in this project.
As mentioned previously, there will be an increase of $392.9 million in the department's main estimates over the previous fiscal year. I would, however, want to point out that this figure is actually $277 million when one takes into account the transfer of the $115.8 million related to the TWRI. The $277 million represents an increase to CIC of 33% over last year's main estimates.
I know some members of this committee have expressed concern that CIC is not one of the new Conservative government's stated five priorities. Well, there are words and there is action. I think you will agree with me that a one-third increase in the overall budget shows this government's commitment to Citizenship and Immigration Canada's mandate and our shared goals.
This budgetary increase is in large part due to the following: additional settlement funding to immigrant outcomes in provinces outside of Quebec, with Ontario receiving $110.5 million and others receiving $42.3 million; additional resources for escalation costs under the grant for the Canada-Quebec accord on immigration, $14.6 million; funding of $77.2 million has been earmarked to address short-term pressures in the areas of citizenship inventory, parents and grandparents, and international students; $7.6 million has been dedicated to improving our service to clients, including the “Going to Canada” website; an additional $16.8 million will help address the ongoing shortfall in funding for the interim federal health program, which provides temporary health coverage for refugee claimants, convention refugees, and persons under immigration detention.
As part of a broader initiative that includes partners such as the Immigration and Refugee Board, the Department of Justice, and the Canada Border Services Agency, CIC will receive $2.9 million to support enhancement of the refugee determination system, including faster processing, a reduction in pending caseloads, and the speeding up of grants of permanent residence for persons recognized as refugees.
Members should note that the 2006-07 main estimates include reductions due to government-wide reallocation initiatives from the 2003 federal budget, transfers related to the creation of the Canada Border Services Agency, and the sunsetting of funding related to the global case management system or GCMS project.
I would be remiss if I did not briefly mention some other progressive initiatives that the government is adopting, all of which focus on improving outcomes for immigrants.
The right of permanent residence fee, the RPRF, has been reduced by half, from $975 to $490, for immigrants who become permanent residents under all social, humanitarian, and economic classes.
To keep our promise to support Canadian families wishing to adopt foreign-born children, we've recently introduced legislation that makes it far easier for such children adopted by Canadian parents to become Canadian citizens once the adoption is finalized.
Approximately 100,000 foreign students currently studying in Canada can now apply for off-campus work permits.
We are also taking steps to establish the Canadian Agency for the Assessment of Foreign Credentials. Though this agency is not within my mandate, I would like to indicate my support for the initiative spearheaded by Minister Diane Finley. We need to ensure that barriers to an efficient and flexible labour market, such as the lack of recognition of hard-earned but foreign credentials, are reviewed and, where warranted, removed.
I have outlined my goals for improved policies and operations that can only serve to strengthen CIC's mandate and performance. My view and goal is quite simple: the better the job we do at helping newcomers integrate into Canadian society, the better it is for immigrants, and, in the final analysis, the better it is for Canada and Canadians.
[Translation]
I believe that our funding intentions reflect the deep commitment that the Government has made to better support newcomers to Canada and to ensure they can fully contribute to our communities and economy.
[English]
As I stated before, the introduction and approval today of the department's main estimates, estimates that provide significant and additional funding, will be a vitally important first step toward meeting those important objectives.
This is a strong beginning. Once again, I would like to thank you for allowing me to share my vision of the future of CIC, Citizenship and Immigration Canada. I look forward to working with this committee.
Thank you. Merci.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr. Minister.
I just wanted to cover off your preamble, which I have to thank you for, when you said you're going to seek our help and guidance in meeting these challenges. I appreciate the ability of all parties to work together.
As I said the last time we met, I think the biggest challenges facing Canada are, first, our lack of skilled workers and, second, the ticking time bomb we have with our aging population. By 2012, 2014, we're going to have more people in retirement than we are going to have working for Canada.
Luckily, we have a solution at hand to the problem of our lack of skilled workers, and that is the 800,000 people who are waiting to come into Canada, 500,000 of whom are skilled workers, who take, on average, 58 months to get in here. But luckily, after 10 years of prosperity here in Canada, the government of the day has an enormous fiscal capacity to deal with this. Mr. Minister, I have to say that a $277 million increase in your budget is fabulous, and it's going to go a long way.
In my experience, in business and outside government, though, if I ever gave a manager, or if I was ever given as a manager, an increase to a budget of 33%, or $277 million, I'd sure want to make sure I had measurable goals and objectives. Last year, Canada accepted 262,000 people. The goal the department is setting for itself is 255,000, which is 7,000 fewer people than last year, with $277 million more in the budget. As a Conservative, how does that lack of fiscal responsibility...? How do you square the circle?
:
I think the 1% number was very much a political number, and some people still labour under the illusion that we're hitting it, nearing it, or something.
But setting that aside for a moment, I think it's important to have some targets. The targets should take into account a number of factors, such as the department's ability to gear up and process the applications, the country's labour market needs, and the ability of settlement agencies and provinces to put the infrastructure in place to help people.
Of course, the only way you can determine that is to sit down and talk with these groups, which is what we're starting to do. I think if you do that, then you can have an immigration system that's a bit more orderly.
But saying that, I think it's obvious we have labour market challenges today. While immigration is not the complete answer, it may be part of an answer to our demographic challenges. We need to take these things into account, which is one of the reasons why, for instance, we encourage younger newcomers to come to Canada, because obviously older people don't necessarily solve the demographic challenge. In fact, they make it worse, looking at it from that perspective.
But I would also hasten to add that I think it's true that everyone who comes here makes their contribution in their own way, whether it's addressing the workforce or helping with families, which is the reason grandparents and parents come here. So everyone makes their contribution.
But these are all the factors we have to take into account when we talk about where we want to go with the numbers.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome, Minister. This is the first time we've met. I'll be pleased to work with you.
I'd like to talk about three points. The first two are quite brief. The first concerns security. I agree with you that the department has excellent relations with the groups that ensure the country's security, particularly with regard to the review of files of people who want to immigrate to Canada. What I think poses a major problem is the period of time. It takes an enormous amount of time for the security forces to give their opinion on immigrant files. Moreover, on Monday, I intend to introduce a motion requesting that this committee be able to examine this question. I simply wanted to inform you of that.
Second, a little earlier, my colleague Mr. Wilson asked you a question about the cost of language training for new immigrants across Canada. Your answer, if I correctly understood, was that it now takes more time than it used to take to teach English and French because a lot of immigrants now come from countries where their linguistic roots do not resemble the Latin roots of our languages.
Did I correctly understand what you said?
Allow me to tell you, as a former linguist, that that has nothing to do with anything. Regardless of the roots of a language, Indo-European or whatever, it is just as easy for an individual to learn one language as another. The proof of that is that, a number of years ago in Quebec, when we took in the first Vietnamese immigrants, who were regularly called boat people, the first French classes in Quebec's French-language schools were inevitably full of the children of Vietnamese and Chinese immigrants who had come here without a word of English or French. It seems to me that's indisputable proof.
I'd like to get to my real question. It concerns another immigration problem. We've talked a lot about demographics. Now I'd like to talk about the demographics of one group in particular, the official language minority francophone communities across the country, in Manitoba, Alberta, British Columbia, the Maritimes and so on.
Could you clarify for us what is happening with the agreement reached between the Department of Citizenship and Immigration and the Action Plan for Official Languages? What is happening with the settlement and immigration of official language minority immigrants? Will your government be complying with that agreement? If not, how do you intend to continue helping these people? I put a lot of emphasis on this agreement because we need immigrants across the country, even in communities that live outside the major cities, particularly the official language minority communities. These groups really need to add to their demographic and economic strength in order to survive in this country.
I'd like to have some answers, please.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Let me just touch on a couple of things.
In terms of 80% of the cases of the Federal Court relating to immigration matters, Minister, that's one of the points about having appeals. We heard that from witnesses in front of this committee. Essentially what they said was, if we had a fairer system, fewer of those cases would end up in Federal Court. Another benefit is that it would make decision-making a lot more uniform, which we don't have now. So I certainly hope you go back on that.
The other issue--and I think this is a problem--is that we talked about the shortage of workers in this country, particularly in your home province. One of the reasons we have this problem is that the point system really doesn't allow people who the economy needs to come into this country. When we went to the point system, I was very much opposed to that. The committee, across party lines, was opposed to it.
What we have now is a situation where, depending upon whose numbers you listen to, we have 200,000 to 500,000 people in this country who are undocumented, and most of them are in the workforce. There is a real tragedy around this, because I think in the last election your party inadvertently said we were going to get tough on deportation, and now many of the undocumented workers are getting caught up in it.
There are about 3,000 criminals in that category that we have to move heaven and earth collectively to get rid of, but I think you want to take a look at the undocumented workers, because as you mentioned, immigrants coming into the country now maybe aren't doing as well. I can tell you that a tradesperson who is needed in a shop is doing quite well, and that person is undocumented too.
To put it in proper perspective, in the big picture, if Frank Stronach came to this country today--he came here in 1952 or 1954--he would not get in. If Frank Hasenfratz, who has Linamar, which has 10,000 employees, were to come to this country today, he would not get in. The one we might be more familiar with in the sense of being more contemporary with us--we all use the BlackBerry--is that if Mike Lazaridis' father came to this country today--he came here in the mid-1960s as an apprentice tradesperson--he would not get in.
There is a real disconnect between what the economy needs and who we're letting in. So on the one hand, you have doctors, physicians, driving taxis, who can't get licensed. On the other hand, you have people who the economy does need who are working underground.
I'm hoping we're going to look at the United States. They're undergoing regularization. I think we can do something similar, and we could all work together in that regard. I hope, Minister, that you will take a look at that.
:
First of all, I agree that the most important thing that people bring to this country is not their skills. I think it is their initiative and their desire to get ahead.
All of us sitting around this table come from immigrant stock. My family wouldn't have made it in here under the current rules. I agree with you. We have to find a way to make sure that people don't necessarily have to have a PhD or a degree of some kind to get in here.
We need them not just because we want them to go to work in the labour markets, but because, as you correctly point out, a lot of these people, just by virtue of making the decision to come here and leave their home country, show enormous courage and initiative, and we want to somehow harness that. So you're right, we do have to find a way to accommodate people like that.
On the issue of undocumented workers, I won't commit to your numbers. The numbers I hear are a little lower. Nevertheless, I take your point that in some cases they are doing extraordinarily well. The problem I have as minister is that I have to ensure that the integrity of the system is upheld.
If you somehow suggest that we're going to allow regularization, you're sending a message that you should come to Canada now because you're going to get in. Some countries we don't have visas with. In other situations, people are able to get here in other ways. I don't think there's any question that there would be some kind of a pull factor.
I would like to work with the committee to talk about ways to make it easier for people with different skills to get here, or just people who have hard hands, as they used to say, and a desire to get ahead.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I dispute the figures that my colleague Barry Devolin provided a little earlier. I have no idea where he got them, and I feel obliged to respond to him. With the help of my colleague Andrew Telegdi, I'd like to provide these figures, for television and also for the minutes of these meetings.
First of all, in the nine years from 1985 to 1993 when the Conservatives were in power, 1,583,000 persons were admitted to Canada as immigrants, an average of 175,947 persons—let's say 176,000 persons—a year, under the Conservative government. If we calculate an average for the 12 years of Liberal rule—that's 12 years compared to 9 years—we get 2,668,000 persons. Of course, there's a difference of three years there. However, the average number of immigrants entering Canada under the Liberal regime was 220,323 a year, a difference in favour of the Liberals. Under the Liberal regime, there were 46,376 more landed immigrants each year than under the Conservative regime.
I'd also like to emphasize another point, with the help of my colleague Andrew Telegdi. It's being said that, under the Liberal government, we didn't achieve our immigration objectives. When you refer to Citizenship and Immigration Canada's website—and that's where my figures also come from—you can see that, in 2000, when we set the objective of taking in between 200,000 and 225,000 persons, we accepted more than 227,000. I won't talk about each year, since I know that the chairman will cut me off. Every year between 2000 and 2005, we exceeded the minimum that we had set, which was either 200,000 or 225,000 persons. Sometimes, we even exceeded the maximum objectives that we had set. In 2005, the objective was to take in between 220,000 and 245,000 persons, and we achieved an immigration rate of 262,191 persons.
I got those figures from Citizenship and Immigration Canada's website. That's not aimed directly at you, Minister, obviously, but I felt we had to have concrete and true figures.
:
We're sharing questions.
This one may be a bit tougher, Minister. However, I feel we should ask this question now.
An administrative change concerning the recovery of costs to process files was introduced in 1994. So we're talking about fees for processing an immigration file. I know that a question will soon be put to the Federal Court and that a class action suit has been filed in Vancouver over violations of the act concerning public administration of the collection of those fees by the department.
On Monday, we heard from the Auditor General of Canada, who also confirmed some of those allegations and said she would conduct a review of what happened.
I know this dates back a long time. All these figures are verifiable; they appear in the reports. This doesn't necessarily date back to the time when the Conservatives were in power.
Can you in fact tell us how many people were affected and will have to be compensated? And how much will that cost us?
The reason I ask you that question is, when we examined estimates in previous fiscal years, there was a writ of mandamus. Consequently, at the time of the writ, we were able to determine how much that cost us. However, the department's representatives had to come back here before the committee seeking supplementary estimates.
In this case, if a writ of mandamus has been issued, I hope you have an idea of the costs. Perhaps you can inform us of them in advance, if possible.
I want to get back to the undocumented workers, because you mentioned, Minister, that it would be compromising the integrity. It seems to me that the previous ministers we had all saw this as a problem and they were all working on it.
My dealing with the department goes back to 1998, and I have always detected a level of hostility from the bureaucracy, particularly in doing something like regularization. The fact of the matter is, when you're looking at spending a great deal of resources on rounding all these people up, getting them out of the country, spending lots of money on getting them on the system, and waiting for five years to get them back in, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I mean, if anybody messed up and this was changing those numbers....
When we say that immigrants aren't doing as well as they've done in the past, well, they're not. Obviously, if a physician or a scientist or a lawyer or a teacher drives a taxi, they're not going to do as well as lawyers and teachers and scientists and accountants, if you will, who are employed in their particular profession. The point I'm trying to make is if you get a plumber who is working in the construction sector, and it depends on the plumber, but you compare that plumber to another plumber, I dare say the gap would be a lot more. The point I'm trying to drive home is this problem got created with the point system and is one of the reasons why the numbers have gone up.
Minister, I would urge you to work with all the parties to come up with a direction on this, and I think we can accommodate most of the people who are here. In some respects you could look at them as immigrants on probation. You can't let immigrants into this country on probation. Once somebody is an immigrant, they're an immigrant and they're in. In these cases, if the person has shown that they are contributing to the economy and contributing to the society, then I think there's definitely a case to be made for regularization and letting them work toward status, a landed status, and citizenship.
This is a direction the Americans have taken for their own reasons, because they know if they got rid of all of the undocumented workers in the United States, they would go into a depression. I dare say in Canada we could probably go into a recession.
I urge you to work with all the parties to try to come to a solution on this. Ask your officials to bring you the plans that were being put together for the previous ministers.