Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Dec. 12th, 2023

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

We should continue the debate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Great. We will continue the debate. Thank you.

I'm sorry, Ms. Kingsley and Ms. May. Thank you for coming and being here as scheduled. We'll make sure that our clerk contacts you to come back to share your thoughts with us at some other point in time. Thank you.

We'll continue with the debate.

Mrs. Zahid, please go ahead.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I just want to put on record that I voted against the amendment because the language, the way the main motion is, is putting the blame on newcomers. Canada is a country that has been built by newcomers. Many of us sitting around this table came to Canada to build a better future.

The issue right now, what we are discussing, is international students. The federal government has a certain jurisdiction. Provincial governments have a certain role. All this blame is not for the federal government. Who gets admission at which college and which university is the decision of the designated learning institutions, and who gives accreditation and who lists them as designated learning institutions? It's the provincial governments.

In my home province of Ontario, it's the provincial Conservative government. The issue is not the international students; the issue is that many international students are being defrauded. We definitely need the talent of the international students, but at the same time, we have to make sure that those international students who come here are protected also. The issue is with those private colleges, which, if you go there, you see are one- or two-room colleges, but they have thousands of students listed as students there.

The provinces have to step up and make sure that before they admit students or before they identify an institution as a designated learning institution, they do their full homework and make sure that those institutions that have no capacity to absorb those students are not listed as designated learning institutions. It is really very important that provinces look into this issue seriously to determine which colleges can be designated learning institutions and to establish a process before these students are admitted.

I hope the provinces will look into this issue, because it is adding to many issues for the international students. In talking with international students and their deputations, I have heard that in many cases international students have been defrauded either by their institution or by some lawyers or consultants. As we are all here, it is really very important that we look into this.

Housing definitely is an issue. We definitely need to build housing, and since we came into government in 2015, we have created a national housing strategy. I was with the Prime Minister back in December at an announcement of a significant chunk of money being given to the City of Toronto to build more houses through the housing accelerator fund, so we are stepping up and we are having agreements with many cities to make sure that we build those houses faster.

There is no one thing that can be done to build more houses. It's different, and all governments have to take responsibility. Provincial, federal and municipal governments all have to step up to make sure that we have appropriate housing for those students who are coming to Canada to build a better future.

I definitely will not support this motion, but it is important at the same time that we make sure that we don't put the blame on the immigrants. This country has been built by immigrants. If you heard, last week there was a study showing that the birth rate is declining here in Canada, so it is important that we welcome new immigrants but at the same time it is important that we make sure that no fraud is happening with the international students.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you.

Mr. McLean, the floor is yours.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, colleagues.

At the beckoning of my colleague from the NDP, we went through my colleague Mr. Redekopp's motion word for word on getting the ministers before this committee to answer to the decisions they've made in this respect. I have gone through it word by word right here in committee, at the request of everyone. There is absolutely nothing in here that puts any blame on the victims, and anybody who wants to put out the narrative that there is victim blaming here is producing something that doesn't exist. We've even added, at the behest of my colleague from the Bloc Québécois, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, a clause that specifically states that the victims here are not the ones to blame.

We're a compassionate Canadian society. We're bringing in immigrants from around the world. In order to do that we have to have places for them to land and live here, and we've shirked that responsibility as Canadians. Who's the lead on that, as far as immigration goes? It is the federal department of immigration, led by the minister of immigration. It's led by two ministers of immigration now, one of whom seems to be undoing some tracks of his predecessor and stating very publicly that this was done wrong and that we would like to make sure that these mistakes don't happen again.

However, I go back to the point that there's nothing in here, in these words written in very clear English, that has anything to do with victim blaming. Those words come out the mouths of certain people who are establishing a narrative, and it is not anything written on paper that does that.

Yes, as Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe points out, there have been 157 years of either Liberal or Conservative governments in Canada, but I will point out that since my time here in 2019, this Liberal government has only been in government with the support of the New Democratic Party. The New Democratic Party here might want to look in the mirror and say, “Maybe there's a better way of doing this,” as opposed to giving carte blanche support to not having ministers appear here to answer for what they've done and why they've done it, which is the nature of this motion.

How did this situation arise? Can you please explain whether you undertook this effort without considering the consequences to housing in Canada and where our newcomers would be housed? I mean, for Pete's sake, some of these students are living four people to a box, and that is not what we expect in Canada. We expect to be open and welcoming and to have housing, food, health care and services available for all the people who come to this country.

I'm going to speak a bit about economic development in housing, because somehow there's a narrative that if the private sector weren't building this, the public sector would do better. I've yet to see one example, including in this ministry, of the public sector actually performing better than the private sector. The private sector does respond to price signals. Is there an ability here to build something that provides a profitable outcome and makes a product available? All the bureaucracy built into building houses right now in Canada needs a solution beyond the government throwing more money at a wall. There are all kinds of impediments to building houses.

Let's look at this from a time perspective. I can tell you that four years ago in Calgary, there were a lot of vacant places. There aren't right now, partially because people have come from jurisdictions run by the New Democratic Party after they recognized that things had gone too far out of control in housing costs and they moved to jurisdictions where housing is actually cheaper. As a result, the cost of housing has gone up significantly in jurisdictions like mine, but the costs are still not as high as they are in the NDP-run province to the west of Alberta, and that's, as I said, the construction of a narrative that is neither constructive nor realistic.

The last part I want to discuss here is this diversion from responsibility. If we're going to divert from who's responsible here as far as the immigration system is concerned—and that is the intent in not supporting this motion—because we're not looking at who should be or is responsible, then we're not holding the decision-makers to account.

All of us around this table are supposed to be held accountable by our constituents. You show up here and you make decisions with Canadians' money, with Canadians' social system, with Canadians' futures, yet there's no accountability whatsoever.

I would prefer if my colleagues passed this motion so that we would actually be able to discuss this matter with both ministers. We can then find out how we arrived at these decisions and how we can do better next time, as opposed to just sweeping it under the rug.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you, Mr. McLean.

The speaking order is Mr. Redekopp, Mr. Ali and Ms. Kwan.

Mr. Redekopp, the floor is yours.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thank you.

Mr. McLean did a great job of explaining our intent with this motion, but someone said he heard it differently or he experienced it differently. If you experience it differently, it's fine, because points (a), (b), and (c) are simply quotes of people. We're not editorializing anything. They're just quotes. If you experienced it differently than we did, that's the whole reason to get them in to ask the questions and get the answers.

As for this issue of the public sector building houses versus private enterprises doing it, I was a home builder before I came here. I don't know if you guys knew that. I still believe I've built more homes than the current government has with its housing accelerator fund. Until such time as there are homes that are actually built by the government, I'm still in the lead. It is kind of amazing that a small entrepreneurial guy can be more successful than a multi-hundred-billion-dollar organization.

Finally, to Ms. Kwan, I'm open to amendments to my motion if you want to throw some of your amendments in there. I'm ready to have a vote on this if we can get to that, once we get through the speaking order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Unless you move a motion to adjourn the debate, the debate continues.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Why don't I do that?

I move to adjourn the debate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

The motion on the floor is to adjourn the debate.

Mr. Clerk, call the vote to adjourn the debate, please.

(Motion negatived: nays 7; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

I'm sorry, Mr. Redekopp. Your motion is defeated. Debate will continue.

Mr. Ali, you have the floor.

[Shafqat Ali, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I just wanted to put on the record why I voted against the amendment. I have a problem with the main motion, which uses language from the Conservatives to say that the immigration targets set were too high.

I'm an immigrant myself. We know immigrants and international students contribute to our country, our economy and our society. Putting the blame for the housing crisis just on students or immigrants is not fair. I think we're missing the point here. Housing....

In the provinces where we have Conservative premiers, they're not stepping up. The federal government is taking initiatives through the housing accelerator fund. In the city of Brampton, the Prime Minister announced that the federal government was providing $114 million to the city for its ambitious housing initiative. The mayor of Brampton said about the federal government, “We are thankful for the Government of Canada’s continued partnership and investment in our community”.

Mayor Patrick Brown said that to the federal government. He thanked the Minister of Housing and the Prime Minister for making the announcement to address the housing crisis in Brampton.

The federal government is doing its part, and the provinces also need step forward to address this situation. We need to work together, but putting the blame on high immigration targets is not fair.

I just wanted to put that on the record. That's why I won't be supporting the motion.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brad Redekopp]

Thank you, Mr. Ali.

Madam Kwan, you're next on the list.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much.

I want to touch on a couple of points.

The idea that in not supporting this motion we'll somehow give the government a pass was the insinuation here. I want to be very clear that I have zero intention whatsoever of giving the Minister of Immigration and the Minister of Housing a pass. I intend to move a motion that does call for both of them to come to this committee to talk about the issues that I raised previously.

On the issue around housing, there were some offhand comments about the private sector. I want to be very clear about this. I'm not saying that the private sector has no role to play. However, over the last 30 years, the Conservatives cancelled the national co-op housing program. Then the Liberals cancelled the national affordable housing program. They walked away from providing support and helping provinces and territories to develop community housing, which is critically needed. Community housing versus private sector housing is very different, because community housing has an affordability component. That is not there, necessarily, for the private sector.

Private sector development in housing has not met the needs of Canadians because it is not affordable. Much of the conversation, even today, on the housing crisis centres around supply and not affordability. While supply is needed—I will grant that—building housing that is not affordable for Canadians will not address the housing crisis for many people. You have to have both elements in place.

I know the Conservatives think—and their leader, Pierre Poilievre, has already said—that co-op housing is “a Soviet-style takeover of housing.” I absolutely disagree with that. We need co-op housing. We need social housing. We need non-profit housing.

Prior to being elected to this place, I worked for a non-profit. Like my colleague Mr. Redekopp, who developed housing for profit, I developed housing, but I was part of a non-profit that developed housing for non-profit purposes. It developed housing to house the people who were most in need and who needed social housing so that they could be housed.

The project I worked on particularly targeted youth at risk, as an example. The organization that I worked for, with the late Jim Green, was among the largest non-profit developers in Vancouver.

I have to say that yes, everybody has a role to play, but from my perspective, what is very critical is developing housing that people can actually afford. That is lacking.

With the motion that I intend to move, we'll talk about a housing plan that you need to actually plan and develop. The federal government needs to provide leadership in that regard, which sadly, I have to say, has been missing for far too long.

If we want to address these issues in a way that addresses the problem and holds the government to account, I'm all in. We have to hold the government to account. We need to find the solution and then we need to act on it and not just talk about it, Mr. Chair.

For those reasons, as I indicated already, I will not be supporting this motion.

I will have my own motion to move, Mr. Chair. When it's the appropriate time, I would like to do that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you, Madam Kwan.

There are no more speakers.

I will ask Mr. Clerk to take the vote on the motion of Mr. Redekopp, as amended by Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

(Motion as amended negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Go ahead, Madam Kwan.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

I think I'm next on the list.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

You said you didn't want to speak on the—

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

I didn't want to speak any more on the issue we just spoke on. I didn't want to be taken off the list to speak before I had the motion.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

The motion is defeated, so—

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair—

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Go ahead, Mr. Redekopp.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Chair, I believe what he is saying is that he didn't want to speak to the motion. He wanted his name on the speaking list for the next—

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

That's what I spoke to you about.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

I understand, but I thought you would raise your hand right after the motion was defeated, so—

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

You put me on the speaking list at the beginning of the meeting. I tried to be first, as you know.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Certainly you were, but just give me a second, please. I'm going to suspend the meeting for a few seconds.