Thank you, Chairman, for having me.
Dear colleagues, it's great to be back at committee. I'm joined by our new deputy minister, Neil Yeates, who's joined us from the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. He has gotten right into our big and complex files. I'm also joined by our new deputy minister of strategic programs and policy, Les Linklater, and our old DM for operations—I mean in the sense of veteran—the ADM, Claudette Deschênes, who we rely on for her expertise and for all of the operations around the world in our many offices.
When I appeared before the committee in June, Mr. Chairman, I explained how our action plan for faster immigration was paying off. Today I am pleased to inform the committee that we continue to make important progress. You may recall that in 2008 Canada accepted more than half a million newcomers, including permanent residents, temporary foreign workers, and international students. We also granted citizenship to more than 176,000 new Canadians. You may also recall that our backlog in the federal skilled worker category, which had reached more than 600,000, had dropped to roughly 515,000 by the end of last year. That was a significant drop of 15%.
Mr. Chairman, as of the end of August this year, this backlog has dropped even further to a little more than 432,000, a reduction of more than 30% since a year ago. We're committed to a strong immigration program that balances Canada's economic, humanitarian, and family reunification goals. We're planning to welcome between 240,000 and 265,000 new permanent residents this year. While many other countries have cut back immigration levels as a short-term response to the global economic downturn, we are actually maintaining very ambitious levels in response to our country's medium- to long-term economic needs and indeed our demographic challenges.
I'd like to update you on some of the things we've done, but it's always worth remembering that since coming to office, we've made some important progress. We're cutting in half the right of landing fee and tripling federal investment in settlement and integration services outside Quebec.
That has always been very well [Inaudible—Editor] in Quebec.
My department has also made progress on foreign credential recognition. Indeed as you know, the Prime Minister reached an accord with the premiers in that respect. I think we'll have exciting announcements to make later this fall in that regard.
Mr. Chairman, since becoming minister almost a year ago, I have also become increasingly concerned by the growing backlog in—and indeed the abuse of—our asylum system. Some people have suggested that the backlog of refugee claims, which now is an inventory of 60,000 claims pending at the IRB, is a result of unfilled Governor in Council appointments at the Immigration and Refugee Board.
As my colleagues here know, the GIC appointment process to the IRB has twice been modified since 1997. Every time there is a modification in the appointment process, there are delays in appointments as a natural result.
I should point out that I have personally made 51 of those appointments and 19 reappointments to IRB positions, and now the Board stands at more than 94% of its full complement of its Governor in Council members.
The current situation is far more complex than just the number of decision-makers at the IRB. Between 2006 and 2008, there was a 60% increase in the number of refugee claims filed in Canada. As I indicated, that growing backlog reached 61,000 this summer. This government inherited about one-third of that backlog, about 20,000 cases, when we came to office in 2006. Another one-third, about another 20,000 cases, were the result of delayed appointments as a result of the transition to the new merit-based appointment system, which I think is working pretty well.
But at least one-third of that 60,000-case backlog before the IRB is the result of the growth of claims above and beyond the capacity of the IRB to process. Even at full capacity, full appointments, full budget, the IRB can only finalize about 25,000 asylum decisions a year. Last year we received 37,000 claims above and beyond the IRB's maximum capacity of 12,000 claims. Clearly at that rate the backlog will continue to grow, and so will wait times.
The government's decision this past summer to require visas for all citizens of Mexico and the Czech Republic entering Canada was based on hard facts and demonstrated the need for action. It was not an easy decision, but in my judgment it was in our national interest. For example, almost one in four of the asylum claims in Canada last year came from Mexico, yet the IRB determined that only about 11% of those claims were well founded. That means that a growing number of asylum claimants are not in need of Canada's protection, based on the numbers we've seen.
The acceptance rate of claims at the IRB currently is in the range of 44%, yet an unsuccessful claimant who is determined to game our system can stay in Canada for several years with a work permit and our social assistance. That fundamentally undermines the fairness of our immigration system. For a legal immigrant waiting to come from Mexico, for instance, through the federal skilled worker program, it's fundamentally unfair to have to wait four to five years and see someone simply jump off a plane, make an asylum claim, and get a work permit even though the claim is not well founded.
Since we began requiring visitors from Mexico and the Czech Republic to obtain a visa, the number of refugee claims has slowed to a trickle. In the two and a half months since the visa requirement took effect, there have been only 17 refugee claims at ports of entry from Czech nationals compared to 831 claims in the same period leading up to the visa imposition. Similarly, in that period, claims at ports of entry from Mexican nationals have fallen significantly to 35, down from 1,287 in the two and a half months before the announcement. Prior to the imposition of visas, Mexico and Czech refugee claims accounted for almost 50% of the total number of claims made at ports of entry. Since we imposed the visas, only 6% of claims were made by nationals of those countries. We've managed to stem the tide a bit with visas on Mexico and the Czech Republic. But I think we can all agree that visas are a blunt instrument and not the ideal solution. I think we need to reform the asylum system.
Since we began requiring visitors to first obtain a visa for Mexico and the Czech Republic, the number of claims has slowed to a trickle. I won't review in English what I've just said in French, except to say that obviously visa imposition is a last resort. It's not something we prefer to rely upon, but to protect the integrity of our immigration system we need to look at reforms to the refugee asylum system.
The committee has Bill C-291 before it, which I acknowledge is inspired by very good sentiment and a desire to ensure a full and fair appeal for refugees. And as the committee knows, the government supports, in principle, the idea of the implementation of a refugee appeal division.
However, that applies only in the context of a more efficient system. We can't add another appeal level to a system that in some instances takes years to turn a false refugee claimant away at the border.
To summarize, I look forward later this fall to bringing recommendations to the committee and the House on how we can streamline and improve our asylum system so it is more balanced--a system that will fully respect rights, due process, charter rights, and our international obligations to asylum claimants, but will also ensure that we protect the integrity of our immigration system and that it does not take years to remove false claimants who abuse Canada's generosity.
Mr. Chairman, I'm available to answer the questions of all members; my senior officials are as well. Thank you very much.
