Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 22nd, 2009

[Elizabeth McIsaac]

May I respond?

I'd like to start with that one, because we have seen that in a smaller scale with the Royal Bank of Canada. Currently the chair of our council is Gord Nixon from RBC. A number of years ago, the Royal Bank experimented and removed the place of education from their application form. You would just put down “Bachelor of Commerce” or “MBA”. You didn't say where you got it or what the institution was. What they found was that more applicants made it further along the process. When a hiring decision was going to be made, then they would go into verifying their credentials and qualifications. You would move further along the stream because the lens of judging where that degree came from had been removed.

I think there is absolutely opportunity for that. Inherently, when people are reviewing résumés or are participating in that screening and hiring process, they apply what is familiar to them in their decision-making. The more you are able to change how that works, the better. I don't know that it necessarily....

I think there are two ways you can do that. You can look at a centralized CV system or what have you. Alternatively, a lot of the work we have been doing has been focused on retraining and on creating an immigration lens for HR professionals. We are working with the HR professional associations so that the next generation of HR professionals will be looking at this issue very differently. Although great strides were made 30 years ago in putting a lens for women in the workplace into the HR practice, and then one for racialized communities or visible minorities in the workplace, we don't yet have that level of practice in the HR profession. I think that's where we would see the very thing you're talking about.

I would like to add one more comment, which goes back to your colleague's point around whether this should be federal or provincial. I think you're speaking very much to those professions that are regulated. Even many engineers don't need to get a P.Eng. to practise. They can be employed as engineers without the full complement of tasks or responsibilities. The vast majority, close to 70% to 80%, of skilled immigrants coming into this country are non-regulated, so I think it's a bit of both: I think we look at federal solutions as well as provincial. There is jurisdiction for those regulated pieces, but many people are not part of that jurisdictional tension.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Madame Beaudin.

Before we go to Ms. Chow, I have a brief question on the CV business. Aren't you afraid of that getting into that phrase about all men and women being created equal, but some men and women are more equal than others?

[Elizabeth McIsaac]

How so?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I'm just asking the question. If you start creating categories of people, don't we get into that, whether it's education or colour of skin or nationality?

[Elizabeth McIsaac]

I'm not sure I'm creating categories of people. I think what we're doing is taking away the category and looking just at the skills. We're paring it down to the essential skills that you're looking for when you're doing the screen, unless I was misunderstanding--

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

That was my reaction to what you were saying, but maybe I've misinterpreted what you were saying.

[Elizabeth McIsaac]

No, I think the intention is to take that away, so that the person screening the résumé or candidate is focused on the essential skills for the position.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Ms. McIsaac.

Go ahead, Ms. Chow.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Thank you.

Quite a few years ago, the Conference Board of Canada said that we are losing $5 billion in lost earnings because of immigrants not practising what they have been trained for. In February 2007, on the behalf of the New Democrats, I put out a paper that talked about the importance of getting information. Subsequently we had the www.credentials.gc.ca website, so we now have lots of information for immigrants or potential immigrants.

We also talked about the need for internship, mentorship, and bridging programs there. In that area, there is a bit of an increase, such as the pilot projects, but there is certainly not a dramatic, comprehensive program. Perhaps you can talk a bit more about the loan funds versus straight grants versus tax incentives, because there are different ways of getting into it. Some of it could be targeted to the immigrants, others to the employers. The incentives would be for the employers, and there are different types of tools.

In your mind and in your practice, what tools would work best? Are there different tools for different programs--bridging programs, mentorship programs, internship programs, loan funds, grants? How do they work? In terms of best practices, can you give a few examples?

[Elizabeth McIsaac]

Sure. I'll start and then I'll pass it over.

With respect to the loans fund, I should begin by mentioning that TRIEC was started as a project of the Maytree Foundation, so there's a relationship between the two organizations. About five years ago we started the loan program, recognizing that immigrants were not able to get credit to borrow money for tuition to get training, to sit for licensing exams they had to pay for, or to receive income support while they were not working. So they created a loan fund for loans up to $5,000.

It was an incredibly unattractive interest rate—prime plus 6%. To my mind, it was a bad product. But people still took it because they weren't able to get credit elsewhere. It shows the vacuum in the availability of credit. Credit was necessary to allow them to get the qualifications or training required to move on and become employed.

The repayment of those loans has been phenomenal. I think that speaks to the viability of the program. I know they're in discussions right now with the Royal Bank of Canada, to look at their interest in coming on board. I think it should also be taken up by the federal government. This department, Citizenship and Immigration, had a wonderful experience with the transportation loan made available to immigrants years ago. The repayment rate was 90%. This allows individuals to take the training they need. It also prevents the creation of paid-for streams of programming that other Canadians can't access. So you're not creating free programs for one group and not the others. We have training and education programs that Canadians pay for and get loans for, and this would provide an equal opportunity for others.

This type of thing makes sense in enabling tuition. We have to consider income supports. The Canada student loans program provides income support for education and training, and so should this type of loan program.

In answer to your question, I think that's different. I think that's allowing people to enhance their skills and get Canadian credentials. It's different if you're trying to entice or encourage employers to step into this field. I think you need to encourage them with things like tax credits, possibly wage subsidies. It has to be made easy.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

It has to be simple and straightforward, not 80 pages.

[Elizabeth McIsaac]

We've consulted to death with employers and small and medium-sized enterprises. Every time we've done a focus group, all they say is, “I don't want to do paperwork”. Their hands go up when they think about getting involved in a government program. It needs to be a quick return for them. I don't know that a tax credit would work, because they wouldn't see the benefit of it for another 12 months. We need to figure out the right mechanism to get them involved.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

What about an agency, a middle person who would assist some of the small businesses? They're quite successful, but because they're so small, they just don't have the capacity to do all this paperwork. You also have to be fairly careful that you don't put out programs the Auditor General might later take to task for lacking the proper controls. Is it possible that there could be a middle person to assist, an agency?

[Elizabeth McIsaac]

I think there could be. I think that could help. This is an area of experimentation. We need to try a few different things to see what works. For the last five years we have been trying to do a number of different things with small employers. A couple have worked; many have not. We need to keep trying. We haven't found the silver bullet, and there may not be one. We may need to have a number of different products that will suit different industries and different-sized employers in different ways.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Amy, could you give us something on the grants?

[Amy Casipullai]

Yes, I'll make a pitch for that. I agree with Elizabeth on the success of the loans program. The challenge, though, is that we only see people who are in a position to access loans. We don't know anything about the experience of people who cannot take advantage of this possibility.

A grant program could be tied to a means test, so that only those who absolutely needed it would be able to access it. I think without that we'd be leaving out a lot of people, particularly women, who would not have as much access to a loans program. It's only the federal government that can do it. It's particularly important now, as we are coming out of a recession and Ontario has been particularly hard hit. If it could be tried even as a pilot, just to see how it would work, that would be useful.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Mr. Dykstra.

Okay, Mr. Owen, but be very brief.

[Timothy Owen]

Elizabeth mentioned the need for income support. I think that's a part that is often missed. Most of the people we're trying to attract already work maybe one or two jobs. They can't afford to go back to school to be retrained because they can't afford not to work. Without an income support program, many people would be left out.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Dykstra.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It was an interesting presentation. I'm intrigued by the level of detail you're speaking to in terms of what all three of you think the federal government needs to do. If I take a look back over the last, I guess, close to four years.... Just recently we announced $50 million over the next two years for the provinces and territories to work and address these barriers in terms of a pan-Canadian framework, including a recognition of foreign qualifications.

Amy, you mentioned the Canadian Experience program, which is very helpful to students.

From a temporary worker perspective, I also think about the opportunities that they are engaged with, to stay in the country and work here. We've gone from 120,000 to 200,000 on a yearly basis, to the point of literally setting records in terms of those numbers. Also, with respect to how many folks have had the opportunity to come to this country as landed immigrants or to be educated here, the numbers we're seeing now year after year are higher than we've seen in decades.

I think a little bit about the detail that you spoke to, Elizabeth. I think of C-50, section 6, which we passed in 2007. That really does change our immigration policy with respect to landed immigrants and the opportunities folks have from a very early stage to understand, if they're going to apply to come to this country, what we need in terms of the 38 categories that we announced last November for this year. That has actually allowed us to expedite the opportunities for individuals who want to come to this country who are having to wait six, seven, or eight years to get into Canada. The way it's set up now will expedite that to 12 to 18 months. The minister was just here a couple of weeks ago saying that we've actually been able to get our numbers down and we're moving in the right direction.

Ms. Chow reminded me of The Employee's Roadmap.

All of these are a step in the right direction, and I think the investments we've made in English as a second language and in English language training.... I guess what made me think of all of these programs that we've worked on since 2006 is--as I started this point, and I do have a couple of questions--the fact that you're really into significant detail in terms of where we need to be. So it suggests to me that from an overall perspective.... Part of the reason why we wanted to do this study was to ask where are the areas that we need to emphasize, where are the areas that we need to focus on. I come away from it, just from our first panel, with an understanding that we have made some significant steps in the right direction, and that really where we need to go is, perhaps as you suggest, in some of the levels of detail.

I did want to ask you, Elizabeth.... We have gathered the provinces together to work towards the recognition of foreign credentials, and I wondered if you could comment a little bit .ore on the whole aspect of a national approach to this issue versus an individual provincial and individual territorial approach to it?

[Elizabeth McIsaac]

I think there needs to be a national vision of where it's headed. As Tim and another one of your colleagues rightly pointed out, with some of the regulated professions, there is a necessary provincial lead role because of the jurisdictional issues. But I think we set immigration policy federally. This is about building a nation. It's about economic building. So I think the way in which we engage employers as a shared partner in this vision--because this is about economic contribution--is that they need to be sharing that vision and they need to be part of it. I think right now they're an afterthought, and I don't think they feel they're part of crafting the direction that it's headed in.

So I think that's why on the one hand they need to understand--and I think Amy spoke to this as well--what their role in this is and what they have to gain from it, that value proposition needs to be understood by them. But they need to be partners with you, I think, in setting the course for this. I don't think they should be deciding who comes into Canada. I think that remains a government role, but especially for the skilled category, the economic class, as to who is coming in, that is a direct and obvious economic program. Let's make that work so that people do connect to the labour market effectively. In order to do that, I think you need to have the national strategy. I'm not sure what that would look like in absolute detail--I'm sorry I didn't come ready with that--but I think those elements that I spoke to need to be part of it.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Okay.

Very quickly, because I want to give my colleague, Mr. Calandra, an opportunity to ask a question or two, one of the things that we included and I mentioned at the outset was the investment we've made in terms of pre-landing knowledge of credentials, making investments in countries like India, China, the Philippines. We are trying to assist individuals so that rather than coming here and having to work through those issues, they'll be able to do that pre-landing.

I wonder if you were aware of this and if you could comment on whether or not you think this is the correct and right thing to do.

[Elizabeth McIsaac]

I think you'll hear better from the people who are actually running the program at the Association of Canadian Community Colleges, but what I know of the program is that it has had very early successes, good successes. More information before people come is incredibly important. I think a lot of people who are coming are still confused. There's a multitude of portals out there. I think we need to do better on occupation-specific information. I think what has started through the FCRO, with the overseas offices, is going in the right direction, and we probably need to do a lot more of that because it is helping.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you. I appreciate that.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You have about 30 seconds.