Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Nov. 19th, 2013

[Andrew Cash, NDP, Davenport, ON]

Will the EOI system interact with the temporary foreign worker program?

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

It will interact to the extent that temporary foreign workers and students in Canada are already a major source of immigration to Canada. People apply, not just from the live-in caregiver program, but from other temporary foreign worker streams to be skilled tradespeople, skilled workers, especially to enter Canada under the provincial nominee program.

So yes, there is a very direct connection, but these are different programs. The temporary foreign worker program is not in itself an immigration program, but it can bring people to Canada who then choose to apply to immigrate.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Thank you, Mr. Cash.

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. McCallum, you have the floor for five minutes.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Welcome, Minister.

I noticed in your opening comments that you talked about declining backlogs, and you mentioned again about the average waiting time being a year, which is also what you said in the House two weeks ago. But if you go to the home page of your own departmental website and click on “processing times”, it gives you all the waiting times for each category as of now. There you will find that for parents and grandparents, for entrepreneur class, and for investor class the waiting times are in excess of five years. For live-in caregivers, it's in excess of three years. For every category, it's in excess of one year. So how, when your own website on the home page says all that, you can possibly say it's one year is beyond me.

Related to that, in the House at that time, a couple of weeks ago, you said my facts were wrong when I said that the waiting time for family class increased from an average of 13 months in 2007, when the Conservatives were in power, to 34 months in 2012—almost a tripling when the Conservatives were in power. The waiting times for the Chinese, for example, went from 7 months to 39 months over those same five Conservative years. You talk about declining backlogs and you talk about one year, but the facts of the matter, from your own website, are totally contrary to that, with huge increases in waiting times over the last five years and with very long waiting times, which cause great pain to new Canadians as of this moment.

That's just to correct the record. That's not my question.

My question is about your EOI system and the fact that you're not going to allow for any consultation on this. It was confirmed by your officials that the ministerial instructions will be released for public comment before they become official. I would argue that the devil is in the details, and there is some advantage to be had in a period of public consultation. I would mention the Canadian experience program. Again, that was sprung on people with no consultation. It left thousands of foreign students and temporary foreign workers in the lurch who thought they had a chance to stay here. Now they don't. There was no consultation.

My question is, why do you spring this on people without affording commentators, third parties, the opportunity to make their comments, which might lead to an improvement in the program?

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

We have absolutely no intention of ending consultation, of doing anything other than reinforcing consultation with regard to the expression of interest system. That's why we're here today to discuss this legislation.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

But that's not my question. Why are you releasing the ministerial instructions without a prior opportunity for experts to see them in advance and to offer opinions? It's not to come here and talk to us before we know what they are, but rather to release them in advance so that experts can make comments, possibly leading to improvements.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

It's because the ministerial instructions are based on legislation that you enact, which this committee and our Parliament of Canada enacts. The whole EOI system, which, yes, will need to be implemented on the basis of ministerial instruction, and various immigration programs adjusted on the basis of ministerial instruction, is subject to very elaborate public consultation.

I've only been the minister for four months, but we have been discussing EOI in round tables, in public, in consultations, in speeches across the country, and we look forward to doing it in the media. We look forward to doing that on a continuous basis. Officials have been having very detailed consultations with the provinces and territories. We continue to be in touch with employers. All of you are welcome to be part of those consultations when they happen, but—

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

That still doesn't answer my question.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

On the question of backlogs, if I can just give you 30 seconds of reply, it is a one-year waiting time for the federal skilled worker program—I've said it in the House, I will repeat it here—and it's close to that on our website. It will go even lower as we implement EOI.

With regard to parents and grandparents, I have never pretended that it was one year. It is several years for parents and grandparents, but it has come down under this government—

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

It has not.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

—from an extremely high level, and it disturbs me to hear Liberal members, including you, continue to deny these basic facts. It was a much larger backlog when we took office. It is smaller now, and we are allowing a huge number of parents and grandparents, a record number, to enter.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Thank you, Mr. McCallum.

Thank you, Mr. Alexander.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Can I add one question?

The Bloc is presenting a bill to take Quebec out of multiculturalism. Will you support that?

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Thank you, both of you.

Mr. Wallace, you have seven minutes.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

I do find it a little bit rich that our Liberal colleague here talks about how the devil's in the details. He's supportive, in principle, of EOI, but the devil's in the details. His leader goes out and criticizes the program without knowing any of the details. He should look in his own backyard to express those concerns he seems to have today. We will be hearing from stakeholders at these meetings, even in the next hour.

I have two questions, though, before I share my time with Mr. Weston.

We're not the first in the world to implement this program. I believe Australia and New Zealand have it. What are we doing that differentiates ourselves from them? They're competitors. Have we learned anything from their experience?

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Those are excellent questions.

We are learning from their experience. We are increasing the scale of this initiative beyond the smaller scale of those two countries. By definition, our EOI will be different because we have different immigration programs. As I say, it's a framework for our existing programs. Our programs will change, but they're not going to change dramatically as we approach January 1, 2015. Our immigration will remain different from theirs.

What is the competitive advantage? We are going to be faster. And I hope that, with time, more of our immigration—which is already rising—will be driven by online applications, by electronic processing. We'll have to do that if we're going to meet the sixth-month timeline. That's the main competitive advantage that Australia and a few others have had over us—the processing times. We've had backlogs and they haven't.

The other advantage we have is the strength of our economy. EOI will only work and economic immigration will only continue to be successful if there are jobs and if we have the strong and in many ways unique position that Canada has in the world today, with its potential recognized, with its financial system highly rated for stability, and with whole sectors developing on a scale that few other countries can boast.

But this brings us back to the issue of what the Liberals are really saying on immigration. I think it is disturbing, because we've heard it from their leader and we've heard it from their critic. They express concern that we are focusing so much on economic immigration. Since when has Canada ever had a period in its immigration when we didn't want the people coming here—our ancestors, our friends and colleagues, our neighbours—to work when they got here? That is what immigrants themselves want. That is why they come, to contribute to our economy. Yes, they come to bring their culture and benefit from great cities and great communities, but they want to work. They want to support their families, they want to contribute, and they want to practise their professions. That has already been the story of Canadian immigration, and we want it to continue to be that.

It's disturbing when anyone around this table or in the House says there is the Canadian economy here and its needs on one hand, but we want immigration to be something separate from that. The logic of that just doesn't add up, I think, in the eyes of most Canadians.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

You have one minute, Mr. Weston.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to thank you, Minister, for being here today.

I have done a lot of research, and I would have a suggestion for you. I would like to suggest a name for this program, so that we can distinguish our program from other programs. It would be as follows:

“Canada: finding the right job in the right place.”

Over the last few years, a lot of money has been invested in the Foreign Credential Recognition Program. We know that there are maybe 43 employment categories in each province, each with its own office, which means that there are roughly 430 offices for the entire country. How will this new program help solve this problem? How will it help prevent tragic situations where immigrants arrive and look for subsistence jobs and not rewarding jobs?

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Minister, a very brief response, please.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Weston.

I can see from your mastery of the French language that francophone immigration is alive and well in British Columbia.

How will we proceed? We will make the system more responsive. We will immediately identify the expertise that Canada needs and we will invite people to come in less than six months. We will work with Jason Kenney and his Department of Employment and Social Development to make sure that the skill sets we use in Canada are relevant to our modern economy. The categories from the 1970s and the 1980s are not necessarily relevant to the needs of our high-tech companies in 2013. We need to modernize everything.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

I would like to thank the minister and his team for appearing before us today to speak to the bill that we are studying.

I would now like to ask our next guests to be seated at the table. We will suspend the meeting for a few minutes.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

The committee hearing has now resumed. We have a full agenda and it is important that we not waste any time so that we can fully benefit from the witnesses who have accepted to appear before us today.

We have until 12:20 p.m. to hear from our second group of witnesses, which includes a representative of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, Ms. Sarah Anson-Cartwright, Director of Skills Policy, and a representative from Engineers Canada, Mr. Gordon Griffith, Director, Education. Thanks to both of you.

We would like to have a full round of questions so that each member of the committee can ask their questions.

As you have been informed, you have six minutes to make your opening remarks. Ms. Anson-Cartwright, you have the floor.

[Sarah Anson-Cartwright, Director, Skills Policy, Canadian Chamber of Commerce]

Hello. Thank you for this invitation to appear on behalf of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce. I am Sarah Anson-Cartwright, director of skills policy. I am pleased to provide the Canadian chamber's comments on the expression of interest system, which is the subject matter of clauses 290-293 of Bill C-4.

The Canadian chamber supports these amendments and welcomes the new expression of interest, or EOI, system. We believe it will improve Canada's selection of skilled immigrants to meet our labour market needs, and it will improve immigrants' economic and employment opportunities in Canada. There will be both efficiencies and a competitive advantage to Canada by introducing an EOI system. The research is clear that immigrants who arrive in Canada with a job offer in hand fare better economically, and in terms of employment, than those who do not.

In a 2012 report for the Maytree Foundation, authors Naomi Alboim and Karen Cohl write:

There are clear advantages to involving employers up front especially if it results in a good job that matches the immigrant’s skills and expertise. An evaluation of the Federal Skilled Worker Program shows that those who arrived with validated offers of employment were the most successful immigrants within that program. Similarly, an evaluation of Provincial Nominee Programs shows that provincial nominees achieve positive and immediate economic advantages because most already have employment or employment offers.

By introducing an EOI system to programs in the economic stream, the advantage of employer nomination and other criteria for longer-term goals can be realized.

This year the Canadian Chamber passed a policy resolution on the EOI system. The resolution mentioned several key benefits to employers with the system, but it also recognizes the broader context for considering permanent residence by noting that “A demand-driven process will still require attention to other aspects of economic immigration”.

For example, the location of employment should still be combined with availability of settlement services for immigrants wherever possible. In addition, it's important that candidates are aware of the state of the local economy where they may work, including availability of housing and the cost of living relative to wages.

The resolution recommends:

That the federal government, working in concert with provincial and territorial governments, ensure that the new Expression of Interest system for immigration:

1. Be expedient, responsive, and efficient in identifying regional labour needs and in processing applications from both employers and potential workers to meet those needs.

2. Be open to third parties including, but not limited to, international recruitment firms, immigration lawyers and industry groups, which are acknowledged by the Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultants and/or provincial regulatory boards.

3. Encourage regional distribution based on skills and population needs.

The EOI system will apply to programs for permanent residency. The government will set the standards and the program criteria, not the employers. The government will be vigilant in preventing fraud in the system. There will be an opportunity for eligible employers to review candidates and to track the best prospects to Canada with job offers. These immigrants will help Canada meet its skills needs. These immigrants will benefit from better economic success by arriving with an employment offer.

Overall, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce believes the EOI system will be a valuable tool to Canada to be more efficient and effective in the competition for the foreign talent we need.

Thank you, and I welcome your comments or questions.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Griffith, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Gordon Griffith, Director, Education, Engineers Canada]

Thank you for the opportunity to appear today.

My name is Gordon Griffith and I am the director of education with Engineers Canada.

Engineers Canada is the national body that represents the 12 provincial and territorial regulators of the engineering profession.

These regulators are responsible for licensing over 260,000 engineers in all fields across Canada.

The regulators help keep Canadians safe by making sure that licensed engineers are held to the highest standards of engineering education, professional qualifications, and professional practice. I will focus my remarks on clauses 290 to 293 of Bill C-4 regarding changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act with respect to the proposed expression of interest system.

More than 20% of professional engineers in Canada have been trained internationally. Our constituent associations process about 5,500 applications annually from immigrants. This is among the highest number for regulated professions. Obviously the question of how to efficiently assess and license engineers educated overseas has been top of mind for our members. As a result, the engineering profession has shown leadership in foreign credential recognition and continues to innovate in the areas of assessing credentials and undertaking the core activities required for licensing.

Alongside the interest of internationally educated engineers coming to Canada to practise, our sector, like so many others, is facing a looming skills shortage and a skills mismatch. A high number of retirements are expected in the period of 2011-2020. Some estimates indicate that approximately 95,000 engineers could fully or partially retire. Today, there are approximately 60,000 undergraduate students in accredited engineering programs across Canada. These graduates will somewhat help to address the shortage. Our 2012 labour market study reveals that in most jurisdictions there will be shortages of engineers with five to ten years of experience or specialized skills, while new graduates from engineering programs may have difficulty finding jobs. There will be an estimated 16,000 new engineering jobs. Recruiting into the profession will require focused attention by regulators, employers, academia, and governments.

The expression of interest system will, in our view, help bridge the gap for those employers looking for experienced engineers with specialized skills. The one concern we have with the expression of interest system is protecting the ability of regulated professions to keep Canadians safe. The high standards for entry into the engineering profession are in place to protect the public interest. Engineering is integral to so much of what makes Canada a desirable place to live: safe and clean water, reliable infrastructure and transportation networks, and research and development in everything from biomechanics to environmental engineering. Our high standards should remain intact.

In order to help support the work the federal government is undertaking toward the expression of interest system, the engineering profession is looking at how best to assess international engineering graduates prior to their arrival in Canada. We want to do what we can to help individuals with the right qualifications to be as license-ready as they possibly can be before arriving. This includes leading the way toward best practices for engineering regulators; developing a competency-based assessment process for assessing work experience; and developing a Canadian framework for licensure, a dynamic model of regulation that will enhance their ability to regulate the practice of professional engineering to better serve and protect the public interest.

Engineers Canada believes there is value for the economy and value for the engineering profession in better engaging employers in the immigration process and in making sure that those with the skills needed most are moved through the immigration process efficiently. We have been pleased to be part of the consultations on foreign credential recognition, the federal skilled worker program, and the round tables held around the expression of interest system, and we look forward to continuing to lend our expertise. A modern responsive immigration system will better integrate immigrants into our economy and society.

By working with the federal government, we can avoid delays for candidates, for regulators, for the government, and for potential employers.

Thank you again for the opportunity to speak with you today. I will be happy to answer any questions.