Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Dec. 5th, 2023

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

[Inaudible—Editor] meeting and we can have the full list later. That would be appropriate. Thank you.

Starting in 2023-24, the government announced $14.1 billion in spending reductions over five years. That's $14.1 billion. There will be $500 million expected in cuts this year to consulting and other professional services. These reductions will be achieved by freezing the $500 million in the reference levels of organizations like yours for 2023-24. That's this year, yet you've spent another $500 million on top of your estimates on this.

Are we going in the wrong direction, Minister, as far as your budget goes?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Across the system, we are looking at efficiencies. There is no question, in this department in particular, given the rise in the clientele and the historic demands, that we are seeing pressures that have nothing to do with our desire to be efficient in what we actually do...and look at attempts to rationalize how we do immigration in Canada.

That was the point and the conclusion of the strategic immigration review.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Thank you, Minister, but you continue to push these.... This is the department you're in charge of at this point in time. You continue to push these numbers as if each year you're going to have a reduction, and every time you come back with more supplementaries, it pushes you beyond what the last year's spending was. It seems like there's a lack of foresight in the spending here.

I will note that the full-time equivalency you continue to show in your departmental plan includes a reduction of very minimal numbers of bodies, but very large amounts of funding being reduced in the future. Is this a mirage, or are you actually putting some planning into this about how you're going to meet the needs of the department with the resources you have presented in the main estimates?

[Christiane Fox]

We have commitments to make and that we've made on the professional services reductions. I would note that for the interim health benefit, if we have an increase in humanitarian and compassionate arrivals, there will be, by definition, an increase in that spend in the context of people having access to the interim health benefit. There's not a cap. If people come in, they need the health benefit. It kicks in based on arrivals.

I would separate the interim health benefit from the consulting and contracting that we would do with, let's say, IT professionals. We are demonstrating a reduction as early as this year, going into 2026 and 2027 and beyond, as per the budget 2023 commitment that the organization has committed to the reduction.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you, honourable member from that party.

Now we will go to the Liberals and Ms. Kayabaga. Please go ahead for five minutes with the minister.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome again, Minister, to our committee.

Minister, as you know, Canada has been facing significant economic challenges with an aging population and labour shortages in key areas, such as transportation, homebuilding and health care, and our government notes that immigration has an important role to play in ensuring prosperity for years to come.

Can you explain to this committee how the immigration levels plan that you tabled on November 1 will help grow our economy and support our communities?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Thank you.

If the committee so decided, I think it would be highly desirable to look at the demographic curve in Canada—not just the one that reflects all of Canada but one broken down by province and, at times, by regions, because I think people should be extremely preoccupied with how that chart is trending.

If we don't address the lower end of the chart with the younger end of the population through immigration, we will be facing a catastrophe in short order, in the next decades, as people will demand more services for health and more services that they expect to be part of the social fabric of this country. There isn't a part of the country that's immune to that.

You can ask whatever expert you want about those efforts, and they will highlight the fact that Canada has done a good job over the last few years in dealing with it.

What Canadians are also telling us is that it has not come without challenges and without sufficient foresight, including when we're looking at the stress on the health care system, on both sides of the equation. That means people—dentists, doctors, health professionals—working and filling those positions but also the stress that is therefore put on the system by not only the aging population but also the new arrivals. You can apply the same analysis to housing.

There are challenges. The strategic immigration review that I referenced earlier identified those, but what is certain is that we need sustained high volumes in order to address that demographic curve.

The demographic curve isn't addressed slowly through immigration, but it is a big indispensable part of it, and I think it should be the focus of this committee and something on the mind of every person who cares about how this country is going. That, I think, is not necessarily a cyclical electoral consideration but really a generational one.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

What is IRCC's extensive consultation process for developing these plans?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

What we've heard from Canadians—and, again, the strategic immigration review highlighted it—is that governments generally—and I include the federal government in this—need to do a better job of consulting and working with our provincial and territorial counterparts in dealing with immigration as a whole. I mean not only the outward-facing aspect of it outside of Canada, on which we are the envy of the world—you just need to talk to our partners to hear that—but also the inward aspect of integration and social cohesion, which can be challenged at times if we don't do this in the right way.

The provinces have a very large responsibility in this, one that I spoke to my provincial counterparts on two weeks ago in Toronto and on which we all agreed, despite having different views on different aspects of this. The coordination aspect will be key if we are going to continue what has been a very successful Canadian consensus.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

We know there are a lot of bad actors in the immigration systems and that they have been targeting different people, including international students. What measures are you taking to combat the fraud and to protect the integrity of our immigration system, particularly when it comes to international students?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

A large number of people want to get into Canada. I would say that most are legitimate, but not all people are entitled to come to this country. That is just the reality of a country such as Canada, as welcoming as we are.

There are also people who are seeking to game the system, and we can't hide from that. Over and above the extraordinary efforts that are deployed by our own department and Canada Border Services Agency, there are unscrupulous actors, and they will prey, as they do, domestically on the most vulnerable.

In the case of international students, we have seen that time and time again, with false offers of hope for a fake institution that doesn't exist so that someone ends up driving an Uber, or with those just taking people's money and leaving them with a fake offer letter at an acknowledged university.

We have taken steps, in the last few weeks, to work on verifying offer letters. We are looking to strengthen the system in many measures, including by working with provinces to regulate designated learning institutions to make sure this does not attack the integrity of a system that is very important for Canada and for some very bright young minds. All they want is to come here to study and perhaps get a good job, and sometimes a pathway to permanent residency and Canadian citizenship.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you, honourable member.

The clock is at 5:10, so thank you.

I will go to Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe for two and a half minutes with the minister.

Go ahead, please.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In a nutshell, Minister Miller, you're saying that asylum seekers and refugees are a shared responsibility. However, we know that Quebec takes in 55% of Canada's asylum seekers. We also know that Quebec has a $460 million bill for the social services provided, such as housing and French‑language instruction. Quebec is asking you to pay the bill. The federal government isn't providing any services and doesn't want to pay the bill. Given all these facts, Minister Miller, your conclusion is that the Canada‑Quebec accord is a bad agreement, and that Quebec owes Ottawa money.

My question is quite simple. On Friday, when you meet with the minister and she asks you to pay the $460 million, will you tell her that the Canada‑Quebec accord is bad for Ottawa, that it's a bad agreement and that Quebec also owes Ottawa money?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

With all due respect, I won't reveal the outcome of a conversation that hasn't taken place yet. You're the one drawing conclusions that I think are quite wrong and that will mislead the people of Quebec and Canada.

With regard to the 55%, it should be noted that Quebec has done more than its fair share. In some areas, I'm asking for additional efforts. I also think that this figure should be scrutinized. We have moved a significant number of asylum seekers to the Atlantic provinces. We're paying for their accommodation in hotels, both in the Atlantic provinces and in Quebec. Many people came through Roxham Road. Many of them spoke French. Others moved from Montreal to Toronto. The 55% figure should really be scrutinized.

Two provinces carry the load when it comes to taking in refugees. However, they may reap the benefits when these people become Canadian citizens. These provinces are Ontario and Quebec, given their proximity to the United States and the Pearson and Trudeau airports.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Minister Miller, you said that I was misleading people and that my comments were wrong. Earlier, you said into the microphone that, ultimately, Quebec may owe Ottawa money. You can read the record if you want.

How am I misleading the people of Quebec? You said it and I repeated it.

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

You said that one level of government is doing everything and the other is doing nothing, but that isn't true.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

It's completely true. Quebec—

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

The $700 million figure increases each year, regardless of immigration levels—

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

You're still going on about the Canada‑Quebec accord. Is it a bad agreement?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

—so it can't be said that this level of government does nothing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you. Your time is up, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

Madam Kwan, go ahead, please.

The floor is yours for two and a half minutes.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

I just want to go back and touch on the parents and grandparents piece for a minute.

The fact is that the pool has been closed since 2020 for new applications. Come January 2024, it will be four years that people have not even been able to submit an application. As the saying goes, you can't win the lottery if you don't get to buy a ticket. That is the case for parents and grandparents reunification right now for many Canadian families.

I want to go back to the issue around Gaza. The minister said that they're being as flexible as they can be, which I appreciate.

Can the minister advise, on what conditions will the department consider flexibility?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

As your Liberal colleague rightly said, there are variations of family configurations that aren't the ones that I identify with, with respect to my own family. There are people who are considered family members who rightfully need to be supported. I think we look at categories of what those look like.

We also look at need. If there's a relative who is disabled or one that needs particular help, I think that's a consideration that we need to be flexible on.

It is also an area where these definitions can become quite broad and it's one that we have to tailor. Clearly, the current definition is one where we have done our utmost, with the current security configuration, to get people out, but it obviously isn't enough.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

What do people have to do to get the minister to make that consideration, if they don't have an application in the system?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

We would have to know, first and foremost, for security reasons, who we are getting out. I think there are some real security considerations that go over and above our discretion.

Foremost, we would have to make sure that those people are the people they say they are and that they are, indeed, part of these broader categories. Then, effectively, we have to make sure we have the ability to bring them out in a way where we can make sure that the families stay together.