Evidence of meeting #44 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was instructions.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Good afternoon. Welcome to all. On behalf of our committee, I want to welcome Minister Finley, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, to our committee meeting, and her deputy, Mr. Richard Fadden.
Welcome to both of you.
Just for the record, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are considering the subject matter of part 6 of Bill C-50.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, do we have copies of the minister's speech in both languages?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
The minister has approximately one hour. In talking to the committee members beforehand, it's my intention to try to get everyone on for at least five minutes. We came to an agreement about a week or so ago that when the minister would come to our committee meeting we would go with five-minute questions instead of seven. Given that, we should be able to get everyone on for a five-minute round.
The minister has an opening statement of approximately 10 minutes or so.
Minister, I'll hand it over to you, and again, welcome.
Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Citizenship and Immigration
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, honourable members.
Mr. Chairman, honourable members, I appreciate the opportunity to address Bill C-50 on budget implementation, which contains our government's proposed amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
As I said to our colleagues at the finance committee, I'm proud to serve as the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration in a government that recognizes that immigration is as important to Canada's future as it has been to our past. Our country was built on immigration, and our future prosperity and success as a country largely depends on it.
To put things in context, by 2012, all of Canada's net labour force growth will have to come from immigration, but at this time there are over 900,000 people in the queue waiting to immigrate to Canada. Many of them have to wait up to six years before their application gets looked at, let alone processed. The stark reality is that if we do nothing to address the backlog by 2012, applicants will face a 10-year wait time to have their applications processed. The lineup of people waiting to get into Canada could reach upwards of 1.5 million people.
Contrary to the previous government, we do not believe the status quo is acceptable or sustainable.
If we do nothing to address this problem, we risk having families wait even longer to be reunited with their loved ones, and we risk losing the people our country needs to other countries, which are in fierce competition with us for the skills and talents that immigrants bring.
The current immigration system is broken and desperately needs repair. The status quo on immigration is simply unacceptable. The current system is unfair to our country and it's unfair to those waiting to come here. Because immigration is so important to Canada's future, we need a modern and renewed vision for immigration, a vision that involves a new and responsive immigration system, one that would allow us to continue welcoming more immigrants while helping them get the jobs they need to succeed to build a better life for themselves and for their families. However, to realize this vision, changes must be made.
In our immigration system today, anyone can apply. That is a good thing, and we will not change that. It reflects the fundamental commitment to fairness that all Canadians share. However, the current system leaves us little flexibility in terms of what we do with those applications.
By law, we have to process every single completed immigration application to a decision, even if a person has moved on to another country or is simply no longer interested in coming here. Our obligation to process every single application to a decision remains, regardless of how many people apply or how many were able to accept.
Furthermore, we are generally limited to processing applications in the order that we receive them. So quite simply, the current system, if left unchanged, is on track to collapse under its own weight.
In the current context, Mr. Chair, we must realize that other countries are not sitting idly by. The fact is that we face serious international competition in attracting the people with the talents and the skills we need to ensure our country's continued growth and prosperity.
Put simply, inaction on the backlog will result in the people we need going elsewhere as wait times to come to Canada continue to increase.
In Australia and New Zealand, where they have the kind of flexibility we seek, applicants get final decisions in as little as six months, not six years. It's important to note that when compared with the United Kingdom, Australia, or New Zealand, Canada is the only country that does not use some kind of occupational filter to screen, code, or prioritize skilled worker applications.
So compared to other countries, Canada's system is just not flexible enough.
Urgent action is required so that we can welcome more immigrants and their families faster while ensuring that the workers we need get here sooner. To accomplish this objective, Mr. Chair, our government has proposed a three-pronged approach.
Number one, we have committed to investing more resources—$109 million over five years. But more money isn't enough. We also have to do things smarter, better, and faster.
So we'll make administrative changes as well, such as centralizing our data entry to free up resources in our overseas missions for more processing. We'll also code applications in the backlog by occupation so that we can refer applications of interest to the provinces and the territories for processing under the provincial nominee programs.
As part of our administrative changes, we'll also send in dedicated teams to our overseas missions to speed up processing in parts of the world where wait times are the longest, and we'll transfer resources from busy to less busy missions. For example, in October, when we lifted visa restrictions on the Czech Republic and Latvia, we transferred resources to the Philippines to help with the backlogs there.
But increasing funding and improving administrative efficiencies is not enough. Systemic change is needed in order to fix the system. That is why we have introduced legislative changes to give us the flexibility and authority to both manage the backlog and set priorities that would match Canada's needs.
Our proposed legislation will allow the minister to identify categories of occupations—not individuals—for processing on a priority basis; that is, the proposed legislation will allow for the processing of applications based on our country's needs, not on one's individual place in the line. To make sure that we get it right, there are several checks and balances on the minister. First of all, the ministerial instructions will have to comply with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Our immigration system will continue to be universal and non-discriminatory.
The instructions will also complement the objectives of IRPA, that is, to support Canada's economy and competitiveness, reunite families, and protect refugees. These instructions will also require broad input.
Prior to issuing the instructions, the government will consult with the provinces and territories and industry and government departments to shape the approach. In consulting with the provinces, we will seek assurance that when they say they need immigrants with certain skills, those immigrants can actually get their credentials recognized so they can work.
Finally, ministerial instructions will be subject to cabinet approval, ensuring government-wide accountability for the decisions taken. And to be completely transparent, the instructions will be published in the Canada Gazette, on the departmental website, and will be reported in CIC's annual report, which is tabled in Parliament.
Mr. Chair, let me be crystal clear on two key points about these proposals. First, contrary to the misinformation that is out there, we will not be placing any limits on the number of applications we accept; Canada remains open to immigrants and anyone can still apply. However, under the proposed legislative changes, we will not have to process every application. Those applications that are not processed in a given year could be held for future consideration or be returned to the applicant with a refund of their application fee—and they would be welcome to reapply.
The result will be that the backlog will stop growing and will actually start to come down. The flexibility in managing the backlog will accomplish three things: it will help reduce the backlog; it will ensure that immigrants have the jobs they need to succeed; and it will allow our country to continue to grow and prosper.
That is what these proposed amendments would do, Mr. Chairman. However, I should also clarify what the proposed changes would not do.
There are some who are suggesting that this legislation will put too much power in the hands of the Minister.
For example, there's a myth out there that the minister would be arbitrarily able to cherry-pick applicants in the queue and override immigration officers' decisions on individual cases. This is simply not the case, as the minister is limited to designating priority categories, not applicants; nor will the minister have the authority to select an application for processing or reject an application that has been processed and accepted.
With respect to concerns expressed about the impact of the legislation on family reunification and humanitarian and compassionate cases, any instruction from the minister will have to respect the objectives of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which include supporting Canada's economy and competitiveness, supporting family reunification, and upholding our humanitarian requirements.
To be clear, the ministerial instructions will not apply to refugees, protected persons, or humanitarian and compassionate applications made from within Canada. We would also continue to establish clear target ranges for numbers of immigrants that we intend to accept in each category. In the case of family class applications, this means Canada plans to accept approximately 70,000 applicants in 2008.
The instructions must also respect our commitments to provinces and territories regarding the Provincial Nominee Program and the Canada-Quebec Accord.
I know that time is running out, Mr. Chairman and I am looking forward to your questions.
In conclusion, let me just say that our proposed changes to the immigration system are ultimately about people. It's about a vision for our country to make sure that people who have gone through so much to get here succeed at building a better life for themselves and for their family. It's about helping newcomers get the jobs they need to succeed, because their success is our success. And it's about ensuring the future growth and prosperity of immigrants and their families while building a better Canada. These proposals would achieve that vision and would help immigrants continue to contribute to the future of Canada.
I'd like to thank this committee for the fine work you did on Bill C-37, in reviewing that, concerning the “lost Canadians”, and also on the unanimous report you submitted on which that bill was based. I was very pleased and proud of you and your efforts when that bill received royal assent recently.
Thank you for this opportunity to address the committee.
I am now prepared to take questions.
Thank you.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Thank you, Madam Minister.
We'll have five-minute questions, and of course if we have a minimum number of points of order, we can get everyone on for a five-minute round.
Mr. Karygiannis, you're first.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Minister, welcome to the committee.
So there's no misunderstanding as to what you and your deputy minister are saying today, I've e-mailed both of you a list of questions I was going to ask and some information.
I'm sure, Mr. Fadden, yours came through. Unfortunately, the minister's e-mail was full and it kept bouncing.
This is in regard to advertising. I want to read and put on the record a letter sent to me by your colleague, Mr. Michael Fortier, regarding advertising. He says the following:
My department is responsible for issuing government advertising contracts, managing the government's Agency of Record and that buys advertising space or time in the media, and reporting on the advertising activities of federal departments. In this regard, I can report that although government advertising media has declined by 72 % over the last four years, advertising in ethnic print media has declined by only 13 % over the same period. Reductions in government media expenditures have had an impact on all media, but less in ethnic media in terms of its share of overall government spending.
Minister, what is your department's budget for advertising on Bill C-50?
Conservative
Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON
So far, we've spent just a little over $1.1 million.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
How much of that was spent in ethnic media and how much of that was spent in mainstream media?
Conservative
Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON
I believe it was all spent in ethnic media—is that correct?
My understanding is that's where it was spent. Virtually all of it was spent in—
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
These are the ads you're buying, Minister, in the ethnic presses.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Minister, are these the ads you're buying, right here?
Conservative
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
They're South Asia newspapers, Sri Lankan newspapers, street newspapers, Filipino newspapers. I think the department has gone on an aggressive buying spree.
Conservative
Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON
I think it's important to recognize that many of the immigrants in this country rely on ethnic media as their main source of news.
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
Conservative
Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON
We're looking for that information.
One thing I can tell you is that we made sure this information was available in over 20 languages because the reforms affect immigrants more than Canadian-born Canadians. We wanted to make sure they understood what is happening, what we are proposing, because they have the right to know.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
So absolutely no money was spent in mainstream media. Is that correct?
Conservative
Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON
No, I did not say that. I said the bulk of it was spent in the ethnic media.