Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Feb. 25th, 2008

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

It would seem that if someone has never collected EI, it shouldn't be a great step not to pay into that. So it's something that maybe needs to be investigated.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Yes, I think so.

[Andrew Kenyon]

There is one additional piece of information, though. They are eligible to collect, for instance, sickness and maternity benefits.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

All right, so there are benefits.

[Andrew Kenyon]

There are benefits available, but those benefits are limited. So it further complicates the situation.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Which means you may prorate them, or something like that.

I have two areas to deal with, the undocumented workers first and then the temporary foreign workers.

The term “undocumented workers” is perhaps generous, in some sense. Although there are sympathies for that group of people, when I look at the list here, you have, for instance, failed refugee claimants. And maybe this is where part of the dilemma is, that there's a fairly extensive process involved that claimants can go through: IRB hearings; appeals to the Federal Court; leave to appeal; applications for pre-removal risk assessments; and, in addition to that, humanitarian and compassionate grounds applications. So there is a process in place. At the end of the day, when a person goes through that process but chooses not to leave, they would be here in the category of undocumented workers. But they shouldn't be here. Isn't that a fact?

[Les Linklater]

Yes.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Or if they're here on a worker's visa or a visitor's visa or a student visa, when the time has expired you would expect that if they had agreed to those terms, at the end of the day they would leave?

[Les Linklater]

That's right.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

So I suppose if you took it to the worst extreme, some would be here either because they were smuggled or trafficked into Canada illegally and then remain here.

[Les Linklater]

Correct.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

The other part of the dilemma is that there are legitimate means that are being established to get similar types of people in here, which these people may not have gone through. For example, there's the “Canadian experience” class that is being initiated, which is basically to allow certain temporary foreign workers and international students who get permits here to apply from within Canada for an appropriate application.

Is that correct?

[Les Linklater]

That's right.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

And then another legitimate means that people can look at to get here is through the provincial nominee program. As I understand it, provinces with certain occupations they wish to address are given the freedom to nominate various individuals into their immigration plans for their provinces.

Is that correct?

[Les Linklater]

Yes, all provinces and the Yukon have agreements with CIC to be able to nominate individuals who meet their specific economic or demographic needs. For many provinces, that would include individuals who wouldn't necessarily meet the federal skilled criteria.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

So if the provinces chose to deal with some of the skill shortages through their immigration programs, could the people who are nominated apply for permanent residence within Canada?

[Les Linklater]

Most provincial nominee programs do lead to immediate permanent residence. They're processed as we would process any other skilled worker applicant overseas—but on a priority basis.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

So what we have here is a legitimate means for coming into the country, opening up for various skill levels and parties, as opposed to the other instance where the processes that exist have been fully utilized, they haven't been successful, and the people remain.

How do you deal with that group of people if you want to be fair to the other group of people? Is that the dilemma?

[Les Linklater]

That's one of the issues we struggle with, in that there are a number of people waiting to come to Canada legitimately, who have been playing by the rules and are waiting their turn to be processed. There are others who are taking advantage of programs that provinces offer to come forward, and do so legally, whereas others choose to remain after they've gone through a number of processes, or after their legal status has expired, and are in the country and working underground for the most part.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I understand there have been regularization programs in the past. From what I've seen in the information, the uptake has not been all that high, and I wonder why. Many countries that have tried to go through regularization processes have actually tried to create a legitimate means for people to apply and have added conditions to that application, so it's like opening up another category. Am I right in that?

[Les Linklater]

Yes. In fact, a couple of programs were put forward, one in 1973 and another in 1983, and take-up was much less than had been anticipated. There may have been a fear of coming forward or of receiving some sanction for having been in Canada without status.

Certainly given the debate in the United States, while the scope of the problem is much larger there, it is a difficult issue. There would be security concerns, and certainly countries such as Spain and Italy, which have undergone a number of regular “amnesties” over the last couple of years, have incurred the disfavour of some of their EU partners, given labour mobility access across the European Union.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I'll switch now to the temporary foreign worker and some of the issues regarding protection.

There's no doubt that much of the protective area is covered by provincial legislation, and I've heard that each province may have just slightly different rules and regulations with respect to protection. Professor Harry Arthurs, in his review, Fairness at Work, seems to suggest that maybe certain national preconditions could be looked at in terms of when the permit is granted or in granting future permits or in dealing with that whole category. There may be a way of setting up some minimum standards that maybe could be coordinated between the provinces through agreements or something like that.

Can you expand on that?

[Les Linklater]

As I think Mr. Kenyon said earlier, the current regulations are very directive, so should certain thresholds be met for an employer, HRSDC shall issue a labour market opinion. For Citizenship and Immigration or for the Border Services Agency, subject to a temporary foreign worker meeting certain thresholds, we are obliged to issue the work permit.

This is one of the issues we're trying to bolster through Bill C-17, the legislation on vulnerable workers, but I think as we move forward with regulatory reforms--to be able to provide sanctions within our regulatory framework, to refuse service to employers that have not met certain benchmarks, and to be able to share the information with provinces, as we've alluded to earlier--having that common base of information will be key to being able to employ a sanctions regime.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

That completes our seven-minute round; we'll go to our five-minute rounds.

Go ahead, Mr. Bevilacqua.

[Maurizio Bevilacqua, Liberal, Vaughan, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to thank you for your input and your presentation.

Perhaps you could give me an update on the exit control system. Has anything been developed, or are there any plans to address that particular issue?