Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Nov. 7th, 2006

[Blair Wilson, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

You're the minister. You tell me how many more we need in Canada.

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

I guess I have.

[Blair Wilson, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

We need 3,000.

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

No. We're raising the planning range because the goal is twofold. It's to make sure we bring in more people. We also have the foreign worker program, which is not part of the 265,000. We are continuing to increase the number of people that come in through that program and make it easier to use.

The other thing is we have to better outcomes for people. It's unacceptable to have newcomers with incomes 32% less than the Canadian average in 2003 compared to 25% higher in 1980. That's unacceptable, so we've added $307 million in settlement funding. We're trying to bring people in to meet labour market needs--part permanent residents, part temporary workers, part students, who can now work off campus. Later we'll talk about another initiative we want to take, but part of the goal is to make sure that outcomes improve. We can't be blind to that and talk only about great big numbers that we pulled out of thin air.

[Blair Wilson, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Speaking about big numbers, can you let me know what the exact figure is on the cost of the GCMS to date?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

The cost is $242 million.

[Blair Wilson, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

How much more will need to be spent before the program is fully functional?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

We don't know. We hope not any more. By its nature, these things are hard to determine. If we add more capacity, it may require more funding. At this point, I think we've got requests from all the different agencies who want to use it and we know how it will be used. I hope we won't have to add any more funding.

[Blair Wilson, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

And nothing has been budgeted. Based on the analysis you've seen to date, the $243 million we've spent so far is enough, and no more money will be spent on this program?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Not that I'm aware of. It's very hard to anticipate. By its nature, you can't always know exactly how long these things are going to take to implement, because it's a major project, which is why Treasury Board is involved in it. If it takes some more funding, you'll hear about it, and you can ask me tough questions, but we're going to do our best to keep it within budget.

[Blair Wilson, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

What is the annual maintenance cost of the system?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

I'm not certain off the top.

[Blair Wilson, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

I fear the department is heading for a billion-dollar boondoggle here, because if costs are not known--

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

It's an unfortunate choice of words, given that your government was in charge when you brought in the firearms registry and it became exactly that.

[Blair Wilson, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

I fear you're about to repeat it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

We're into six minutes, Mr. Wilson, so I believe everyone has had a chance to speak. We'll start again with Mr. Telegdi.

[Andrew Telegdi, Liberal, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Minister, I've been listening to you, and you really indict the department--It's really dysfunctional. You just mentioned that it's unacceptable that incomes of the new wave of immigrants are 32% lower. Well, I put it to you, one of the reasons they're lower is when you have doctors coming from overseas and they end up driving taxis, obviously that's not going to give them the income they should have, and the same with all the other professionals.

The point system is out of whack, and I can't repeat it strongly enough for you, Minister. Ministers come and go; the only people who go faster probably are the deputy ministers. I can't underline it enough: that was a horrific policy decision, and it was driven by the bureaucracy, unfortunately, rubber-stamped by the minister, who had no more experience than you do, and that's the problem.

We talk about accountability. I really wish we could have the minister and the committee and the MPs holding the bureaucracy accountable. One of the ways we could do it, Minister, is we could try to chase down who drove the decisions, the advice on various policy options that were inevitably taken up by the government. Who was responsible--who drove the change to the point system? It certainly wasn't parliamentarians who drove the impediment to lost Canadians. That was a strong Conservative policy in the last Parliament. It was sponsored by Senator Kinsella and Mr. Reynolds from the Conservative Party.

And the list goes on. Right now, we're celebrating war brides who are going off to Halifax's Pier 21, celebrating 60 years of the war brides. We have Remembrance Day coming up when we honour our veterans. Yet, Minister, your department--and you approved it--is appealing the decision on Joe Taylor, son of a war bride, son of a Canadian veteran who fought for this country in the Second World War. You are challenging his citizenship, which was wrongfully taken from him, the courts have ruled. And of course you got rid of the court challenges program.

Minister, I really appreciated you when you used to be a great finance critic, whether it was for the Reform or the Alliance or the Conservative Party, because you knew what you were talking about; you really did. It's not just you, Minister; let's see, you have one, two, three, four, five, six ministers coming through, five of whom have come through on my watch.

We all recognize Senator Roméo Dallaire is a great Canadian, was a great army person. When he was dealing with the case of Joe Taylor he was asked what he thought was behind the decision to appeal his case. I'm not sure if you saw the clip, but he called the decision absolutely nonsensical.

Now, this is a man who worked in the big system, worked within the bureaucracy, knows what he's talking about, and he said there's a term called “bureaucratic terroris”--that's the gang in the middle of the system that has this power trip of authority, and interprets things not for the benefit of the citizen but for the benefit of the government. That is not their duty. Their duty is to make sure the government is complying with the laws in order to help citizens.

Now, Minister, getting back to it, I wish you'd do an audit to look at some of the bad decisions that have been made. I hate to say it, but they came from the bureaucracy. Try to find out who made those recommendations. Work more with the committee when the committee goes across the country and gets reports on questions you want to know, and use it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Minister.

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

In response to that, the buck stops here. It's up to individual members of Parliament to take responsibility for the decisions Parliament makes. It's too easy to point a finger at the public service and say they made us do it. I don't accept that. We have to take responsibility individually for the decisions that are made. In the end, whether it's IRPA or any of the changes we've made as a new government, these are decisions that pass through cabinet and are approved by the House of Commons.

I understand the member's concerns with respect to being pushed around by the public service, but ultimately if people are pushed around by the public service, it's their own fault, because we're in a position to make a decision to say no or to go in a different direction.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Briefly, Minister.

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

With respect to citizenship issues, I would simply say that we moved forward on Bill S-2 when we were in opposition. There is a pathway now to citizenship for the children of Canadians who moved out of the country. There is a pathway for that now, because of a Conservative initiative, Bill S-2. We are moving forward with Bill C-14. We're trying to get that through and make changes so that Canadian parents of foreign-born children can have their children get citizenship more quickly.

So we are making changes, and we'd like to make other changes in the future, but we don't need to reinvent the act just to do that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

Madame Faille.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am happy to have a little more time today to question the minister.

Last spring, I had expressed my concerns to the minister with respect to the various categories of immigrants abroad who had simply given up applying. I wonder if the minister could provide the committee clerk with an outline of the number of people who do not complete the immigration formalities.

Earlier, I listened to the discussion between the minister and other committee members, and I requested the most recent unit costs. However, we need an idea of how these unit costs have evolved since the change in government. Therefore, we would greatly appreciate an outline for 2004, 2005 and 2006. It only involves a few details.

Moreover, you seem to be steadfast in your refusal of the demand to have some type of amnesty or regularization system.

Can we expect some type of commitment from you? You have some discretion when it comes to determining the penalties that can vary from six months to two years. Also, could undocumented workers working in Canada who are forced to leave be given minimum sentences by your department? Could there be a limit of six months?

I firmly believe that we need some type of regularization program to meet the needs of the industry. However, would you be willing to commit to a six month penalty? That does not seem to be the case in the offices abroad; they seem to be applying a much stricter penalty at this time.

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

I'm sorry, but I'm not quite following you. Are you saying minimum penalties for people who are here illegally?

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

I am talking about people who are here illegally, who leave the country and want to return later. Immigration services determine that they have been in Canada illegally, and apply a penalty that varies from six months to two years. It would appear that the overseas immigration offices use the strictest standard which is a major irritant for groups, particularly those who represent the construction industry in Toronto.