Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 17th, 2008

[Gordon Sutherland]

In some instances, I think that is a valid stand to take.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

I'm sorry, I have to wrap it up here. Time is always a problem. We've gone about a half an hour overtime and we have a panel waiting. I want to thank you very sincerely for coming in and making your presentation today.

At the end of it all we will be doing a report, and it will probably take a few weeks to get it out. Let me assure you that your presentation will be taken into consideration. We'll be making recommendations to the House, the government, and the minister, based on what we've heard.

I know that the case you have talked about, Pastor, has been ongoing for some time. I've been aware of it and worked on it, as you know. Hopefully we can get something done to alleviate these concerns. We have a lot of people across the country in similar situations. It hasn't fallen on deaf ears. We'll be making recommendations. Thank you very much.

We will pause for a few minutes. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Will the members please come to the table so we can get started?

I want to welcome, from the Coalition on Richer Diversity, Barbara Burnaby, Donna Jeffrey, and Jose Rivera. From the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, we have Mike Power and Rick Dalton--old familiar faces. Mike is the international representative for Atlantic Canada, Newfoundland, and New Brunswick. Rick is the business manager of Local 2330.

It's good to see you again, Mike and Rick.

I think you know the drill from what the last panel went through. We allow about seven minutes for an opening statement. How many opening statements do we have? I know we have one from Mike and one from Barbara. So we have two opening statements. When we go to questions and answers, you can jump in and make comments.

Do you have some opening comments, Donna? It's hard to imagine you not having some kind of an opening comment.

[Donna Jeffrey, Executive Director, Refugee Immigrants Advisory Council]

In the historical sense--yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

We have seven minutes for Barbara and Mike. We'll just play it by ear and give you a few minutes. Then we'll go to questions and comments.

Barbara, we'll go to you first.

[Barbara Burnaby, Coalition on Richer Diversity]

Thank you, sir.

We very much appreciate the opportunity to come and give our perspective on the very important questions the committee has raised. I think what I'll do is just read our presentation, and then we can get into more details, if necessary.

I'm writing on behalf of the steering committee of the Coalition on Richer Diversity of St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador—we normally call it CORD—to request the opportunity to present a brief at the hearings scheduled.

The largest sources of newcomers to Newfoundland and Labrador have historically been the United States and Britain, although there has been a greater diversity of sources of newcomers over the past few years.

Recent economic and demographic conditions have highlighted the value to the province of increasing immigration from a broad variety of sources. The provincial government has announced, in March 2007, an immigration policy to better attract and retain immigrants as an important solution to population and labour issues in the province.

In light of the fact that less than 2% of the province's population currently is foreign-born, it is not surprising that amenities to support the specific needs and interests of diverse newcomers are not well developed at present. The province has very few human resources available in social, economic, or government systems particularly to support settlement and integration of newcomer residents. It currently relies heavily on existing services in their current form or volunteer work in not-for-profit organizations throughout the province, especially those organizations created by newcomers themselves, to address newcomers' needs in long-term integration and adaptation.

Since 2005, a group of interested people in the St. John's area have been meeting to consider responses to growing pressure for attention to new social challenges resulting from an increase in volume and diversity among new residents. At first focusing on issues of children and youth, the group's scope has widened to include responses to newcomers' needs in all aspects of society.

In June 2007, three focus groups were held to gauge the interest and support of stakeholders from a broad spectrum of human service work--government, non-government organizations, and individuals. From the approximately 40 people who attended these meetings, strong interest was expressed in the formation of an organization that could enhance existing services through collaboration, coordination, and communication among them. In response, the Coalition for Richer Diversity, Newfoundland and Labrador, the immigration umbrella organization, has been formed. We have put this in so that you understand the context we're coming from.

CORD's aim is to create more opportunities, assess needs, further develop services, and ease the pressures on social support systems. CORD crosses the boundaries between immigrants and longstanding populations of the province, as well as those who walk between the various types of social services. Through research, education, outreach, and mediation, this umbrella organization works to identify what is being done, who is doing it, what needs to be done, and who can do it. CORD acts as a cultural and community broker.

Against this context we have three issues we would like to raise. Our first concern relates to the fact that only one agency in Newfoundland and Labrador has received CIC ISAP funding for settlement services to immigrants. We note that, to the best of our knowledge, every other province has at least one agency providing services under CIC ISAP funding. Even P.E.I. has at least two. It has been our experience that other prospective applicants for CIC ISAP funding in Newfoundland and Labrador have consistently and actively been discouraged from applying on the grounds that services would thus be duplicated. Our response to this is that a large variety of human resources are required to address adequately immigrants' needs as targeted through ISAP and, more recently, through other CIC initiatives. We insist that Newfoundland and Labrador agencies' proposals to CIC, other than those from the Association for New Canadians, be officially received and given fair consideration in the disbursement of CIC settlement funding. We also insist that CIC's parameters for funding, schedule, and specific call for proposals be made known in a timely fashion to all such agencies in the province that are suitable organizations to implement such service.

Our second concern is that a province with a small population such as Newfoundland and Labrador can only serve its immigrant population through an explicit and comprehensive system of collaborative relationships among immigrants and all service providers in the area of human support, such as health, education, housing, special populations, justice, access to and support in employment, and so on. Without collaboration, mutual learning, and work among such groups, this province cannot hope to amass the human resources necessary to deal with the multitude of issues that arise as a result of an influx of newcomers. Therefore, new initiatives toward improved settlement experiences for newcomers must involve a broad range of service providers and maximize the benefit of their experience and knowledge. We see this in terms of sharing of resources, skills and knowledge bases, professional development, research, and so on.

Our third concern is that at present there is no adequate system or facility to support appropriate sharing of the information among all parties implicated in immigration settlements. Heritage Canada has in the past supported the creation of booklets listing a range of sources of information and services relevant to immigration matters, but these have been distributed in print, and no ongoing strategies for keeping them updated have been put in place. In light of the capacities of modern technology, now is the time to create a system of data collections, management, and distribution to meet the various needs of the stakeholders involved.

Thank you for your kind consideration of our perspectives and concerns.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you for an excellent presentation.

Mike, please.

[Michael Power, International Representative, Atlantic Canada, Newfoundland and New Brunswick, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers]

Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

We've already submitted our brief, and it deals with temporary foreign workers. We're going to talk about the construction industry.

First I'll give you a bit of background. We're part of the IBEW, which is the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, which was founded in 1891. It's an organization of workers all across North America, the Panama Canal Zone, and Puerto Rico.

It's made up of highly skilled tradespeople in industries such as construction, power utilities, telecommunications, and manufacturing. There are approximately 58,000 members in Canada, of whom 25,000 are electrical construction workers.

Our presentation will focus solely, of course, on the construction industry, and that's one of the major contributors to the economy in Canada. As the Construction Sector Council reports, it's a $130 billion industry.

There are certainly a lot of differences in the construction industry that set it apart from any other industries in Canada, and I just want to touch on some of the highlights of some of these.

Construction work is pretty well temporary by nature. There are boom and bust cycles in the construction industry itself, and that varies from region to region, province to province, and even within areas within provinces.

Workers in construction don't get up in the morning and report particularly to any workplace. They could be reporting to a workplace today, be laid off tomorrow, and then be going to another workplace. That's the nature of the business. People are pretty mobile, and even the contractors themselves are pretty mobile when it comes to looking for work in that area.

So they go wherever work is, and they look for the best way to earn money to provide that living for their families and to pay their bills.

Because there are such unique differences in the construction industry, it's important that some of the public policy decisions reflect on the reality of that industry as it relates to temporary foreign workers. The issue of temporary foreign workers has not gained any prominence in Atlantic Canada. It seems it's gained more prominence particularly in Alberta and British Columbia because there's a regional construction boom in these areas.

As an international union, we recognize the contribution that immigrants make to Canada and have made to the building of this union throughout its history as a building construction trades union. We're not opposed to immigration. Significant numbers of past immigrants make up the membership of this union, and I'm one of these people. My ancestors came from England and Ireland, so our whole organization is basically built on immigration.

As an organization we support public policy that is pro-Canadian, pro-immigration, and pro-foreign-trained workers. We support the importation of foreign temporary workers if there are proven and justified shortages during boom and peak construction periods and if Canadians are not available to complete the work or there is a shortage of qualified Canadian workers. But we do have some concerns with respect to foreign workers filling some of these construction jobs. Employment opportunities for Canadians--as an example, Newfoundland and Labrador construction workers or other provincial construction workers who entered the industry as apprentices--can be compromised by inappropriate use of temporary foreign workers. That has a negative impact on our youth, our aboriginals, and our resident immigrants.

The IBEW recognizes that temporary foreign workers are a part of the Canadian economy. However, we need to assess these workers to confirm their legitimacy, to ensure they are properly orientated into their workplaces, to assist in their training, and to ensure that labour standards are complied with and that these workers are not exploited, abused, and used as a source of cheap labour.

Temporary foreign workers should have to meet the same selection and criteria-testing standards as Canadian workers in occupational health and safety--red seal certifications in the trades--and should have a valid driver's licence.

We will offer an alternative option with respect to the importation of temporary workers from outside Canada. One of these options is that Canadian unions operate a hiring hall system. Because most of the Canadian building trade unions are part of the international unions that are headquartered in the United States, these union halls can be accessed for a supply of workers. If there are no qualified construction workers available from Canadian local union hiring halls that are international in scope, like the IBEW, we have access to hiring halls in the United States.

Most building unions in Canada are affiliates of international unions. There's a protocol that allows American workers to come in and fill these shortages during peak construction periods. This process is probably a little better than bringing foreign temporary workers from outside North America. The simple reason for this is that these American workers have training and safety standards similar to that of Canadian electrical construction workers.

We have a problem with obtaining the working visas or permits for these people. That process is very slow and cumbersome from our perspective. I would suggest that other international unions besides the IBEW are experiencing the same problems with obtaining working visas to get people in to fill shortages on these job sites.

In the IBEW, there's a pool of 330,000 electrical construction workers in Canada and the United States. These people can be accessed through the hiring hall we're talking about. In the United States right now there is high unemployment in some of these halls, with 50% to 70% of members available to go to work on very short notice.

Access to these American workers is impeded by the wait times for visas. It costs $3,800 to obtain a visa to bring an American worker into Canada through a Canadian hiring hall affiliate. It takes six weeks or longer. To accommodate these American workers coming in through hiring halls, the system needs to be reviewed. It needs to be streamlined so that visas can be issued more expeditiously. Local unions should be able to access working visas for these individuals within a few weeks or even days.

I want to give you an example of a shortage situation that exists right now in Canada. British Columbia Hydro is in desperate need of 50 qualified power line technicians. We used to call them linemen at one time--power linemen. They are available from affiliated IBEW local unions in the United States, right on the border of British Columbia. However, there's an issue with securing working visas to bring these people across the border to go to work for BC Hydro. They're being told that it's taking six weeks or longer to get working visas for these people. In the face of that kind of an impediment, power line technicians who are ready to go to work tomorrow morning with their tools aren't going to wait six or eight weeks. They are going to be on another job down in Arizona or California, where the work is booming. These are some of the issues we have with respect to getting workers.

Right now there's a bit of a downturn in the economy in the United States, and more and more skilled construction workers are becoming available through the hiring halls of the international unions, particularly in the IBEW. The American economy is on a downslide in the construction industry, and a lot of Canadian affiliates could access that supply of workers if we had a system that would allow us to obtain working visas fairly fast.

We suggest that a labour force work plan should be developed. It should be done in consultation with Canadian stakeholders. We need a master work plan with a long-term national job strategy to address the country's labour force needs for all industries, including the construction industry.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

Madame Folco.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

You could give your words to the chair, Mr. Power. That way, the recommendations will be distributed to everyone.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

He gave them to the girl outside. We'll have these distributed.

Donna, did you want to have a word or two?

[Donna Jeffrey]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

I've known Donna a long time. She's met with me on probably 40 or 50 occasions, and when I say a word or two—that's impossible.

Ms. Jeffrey.

[Donna Jeffrey]

Definitely, writing things down is not quite the same.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

That's the Coalition on Richer Diversity.

[Donna Jeffrey]

Yes, but originally, my part of it—I've been put into their group.

[Barbara Burnaby]

The Coalition on Richer Diversity is a multi-organization. Donna is the executive director of the Refugee Immigrant Advisory Council and has been its leading light for decades.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

For sure.

Go ahead, Donna.

[Donna Jeffrey]

I'm going to start back a little bit earlier, simply to give my history as a definite senior in this group.

From 1950 to 1956, I was at Pier 21 helping the port workers. Having been a history teacher...I think it's something people don't realize, how many people came into Pier 21. I was an assistant, because I was a teenager, but every time a ship came in--my father had a big thing on ships--we would go down to the port to see the immigrants come. I helped the port workers, because they were all different denominations; they were Catholic, Baptist, and so on.

They would come in, and it was so simple then. When they came in on the ships, there was one long table with two immigration officers, one on each end. All the officer did was write down the names, where they came from and where they thought they were going. They all left Halifax, where I lived at that time. There was a train outside and every one of them left.

It was so simple. Of course, some of the Europeans, particularly Dutch and German, were coming over at that time. In fact, at my award time in Ottawa there was the senator who we figure was the man who was a young boy then, much younger than me, who came in at Pier 21. He is now a senator.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Was it Senator Di Nino?

[Donna Jeffrey]

Yes, because I had previously drawn a picture.... I was at a Colombian seminar for the Canadian Council for Refugees, where a Colombian person was speaking about the trauma Colombians went through in leaving Colombia. Here I've been in North America—well, my mother's family, since the 1600s in Boston—so I have no background at all in being an immigrant, but at Pier 21 they said, why don't you come up and draw something on the board about your situation. Why ask me, because the Colombians have all sorts of horrible situations? I have nothing.

But I did go up, because I remembered a young boy—and at that time in the fifties they wore the short pants, the knee socks, and carried hard suitcases—who was standing there all alone. He was 11 or 12, standing there, and I kept looking at him and thinking, oh, he's all alone. His parents were obviously busy doing something else, and I said, oh, I'd love to help him. So I drew that on the board. This was a sponsorship agreement holder, because I'm also a sponsorship agreement holder for the Atlantic area for the Baptists. She asked me, why did you draw that picture on the board? I said, it was because I'd never, never forget him, because he looked so lonely, but I could not help him. Then she turned to me, and it was one of those moments, and said, what are you doing now?

Let me tell you this, because I've been doing work with immigrants here in St. John's for about 15 or 18 years, and I don't do it for money. I hold this post, and when I say something is true, it's true. When I say something is wrong, it's wrong.

In some of the cases, we have real, real concerns. For example, I made a report on a case because I found out that we had allowed a criminal to stay here in St. John's. I knew he was a criminal; I knew what he had done. Instead, he was allowed to stay, and when they started to get wise about him, he slipped over the border and is now staying there.

I made a report—and I'm not a writer, but a talker—with the help of a friend of mine who worked for the New York Tribune, who's now retired from that American paper, a big New York paper, and she confirmed everything about what was happening. They were sending back people....

Again, I've been to Russia, because of my husband's work back then, just after it turned from Communism, and I was in St. Petersburg, protected, by the way, by the Mafia. That was the only safe way to keep me protected when I wasn't in Krylov, where my husband had to help them get rid of 2,000 people. The point is, I knew what the Mafia was like in St. Petersburg.

We had a person here who was a saint, and he was sent back. He wasn't a skilled worker, but he was a hard worker. He was here for eight years. He was an absolutely unusual man, and he was deported. I knew, because the Mafia in St. Petersburg, back when I was there, were so bad that.... When he was deported, they kept the man who caused him to be deported, they kept him, and he slipped over the border.

When I got all of the information on him, I made the reports to the head of the RCMP for Atlantic Canada, the head of border control for Atlantic Canada, the head of immigration for Atlantic Canada, the five top people. And I had my friend do the write-up on it, who knew a lot more about writing than I did. I made the report, and I said, “This is it. This is the truth, and nothing but the truth.” And at the end of it, knowing the whole lot of them were younger than I, when they said they weren't going to do a thing, then--

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

I know, because--

[Donna Jeffrey]

But it's the unfairness. It's the same with the man who is in sanctuary. I took him in because, again, of this man.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

I know what you're saying is true, because you've related it to me on a number of different occasions. I know what you're saying is absolutely factual and true.

Now, I really need to interrupt you because I know how long you can talk. I know you can keep going and going all day, because you've done it--you and I together. But I'll have to interrupt you and go to some questions. Those were all the presentations, I think.

[Barbara Burnaby]

I want to put this into context, and that is, please understand that Donna has done all of this and the Refugee and Immigrant Advisory Council has done all of this without any funding.