Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 22nd, 2010

[Marc Audet]

We have to be careful when it comes to Quebec's work. Unlike other provinces that have their own administrative agreement programs with the federal government, Quebec has its own immigration department, immigration offices outside Canada and specialized counsellors. Their level of expertise may be higher, which means that due diligence is higher than in the other provinces. We think that given the volume of applications that Quebec generates in a year and the work done upstream, a 12-month target can in fact be met.

At present, waiting times are 17 to 20 months after the CSQ is issued. So if the client has already waited 8 or 10 or 12 months before being selected by Quebec, you have to add that time to the total waiting time. That must not be concealed, the end result is a permanent resident visa, not a Quebec residence visa.

You also have to understand that Quebec has ambitions in the Immigrant Investor Program, and there will be more, to support our SMEs. The business model works very well in Quebec. Our businesses want more. This enables businesses to grow and hire staff. The skilled workers who enter Quebec need jobs, and those jobs are created by businesses. The program is thus a financial structure that enables the businesses that benefit from it to grow, to create jobs and to keep their workforce in Quebec.

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

I have one last question about how the two programs fit together. I raised the question of duplication, since the process for verifying funds seems to be done twice. Is that process at least consistent? Can you take the case submitted in Quebec City and submit it as is to Ottawa, or does all or some of the work have to be redone between the two steps?

[Marc Audet]

At present, we work with two separate applications, the application submitted to Immigration Québec, and when a selection certificate is issued, the client has to submit a new application using the federal forms, and supplying substantially the same information for the use of the officers in the Canadian visa offices abroad.

For some time we have noticed a better working agreement between Quebec and federal immigration offices, for forwarding part of the analysis already done. Unfortunately, unlike Quebec's program, there is a lot of staff turnover among federal officers around the world, but are businesspeople. They don't necessarily see a lot of cases and they are not always familiar with all of the mechanics. Sometimes, an officer will inadvertently ask for things again that were already asked for by Quebec. That is the business model we have to live with right now.

[Eric Major]

If I may, I will add something. I agree with Mr. Audet: nonetheless there is the reality behind all this that there are officers who cause some delays. In my view, there is a little duplication. Perhaps we would cut a few months off if the analysis, examination and work done by Quebec were shared with the federal government. The federal government could then really focus on the two points: the medical and security issues.

In my view, discussions could be held on this, and that would improve the process and would ultimately be to the benefit of the Quebec program.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you Mr. Major.

Ms. Mathyssen, good afternoon. Welcome to the committee again. You may ask some questions.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Please forgive me, but this is a little outside of my usual area, so I need some clarification.

I want to start with the discussion on the kinds of immigrants coming in. While I realize you focused on the investor program, I'm wondering if in the course of that investigation you were able to talk to some of those folks about their needs.

Once they've set up a business they need people to help them make it a success, and I'm thinking about skilled trades. We know there is a tremendous need for more skilled people along that line. If we're really going to have a successful economy we need a balance in the people we're bringing in. While I appreciate that it's important to have the investors, there are all those other people who support our communities through their work, whatever it is. I wonder if you have any thoughts on that in terms of your study.

[Eric Major]

I could comment on that, given that our organization meets face to face with many of these applicants. We don't deal solely with third parties. We leverage off our network around the world, and my team and I meet with some of these clients. So we get to be very close to these needs and understand them.

For sure, once investors arrive they may have ancillary needs in terms of setting up a business, and we will guide them. What you're referring to maybe touches more what I call the active categories, the categories under which you have an active need to either enter the labour force and work, maybe as a condition of your visa, or to set up a business. That's the entrepreneur category. We come across many of those clients, and they have skill sets and they have experience and expertise in their home country, and they ask us about Mississauga or Calgary or Vancouver. So we try to make those linkages with the local bankers and accountants and lawyers, government representatives locally there as well, to try to make those connections. But I'd be lying if I said it was easy. I'd be lying because Canada is not Hong Kong, it's not Shanghai, and it's not Dubai. So there are adjustments there, but HSBC is sensitive to those kinds of situations because we're in all these markets and we try to brand ourselves as the group that can facilitate this, and we do, to some degree. But at some point obviously more could be done, I think, in terms of helping make that transition.

For investors it's more ad hoc because they don't need to do it. They do it on their own. They have their own networks. But for entrepreneurs in particular this is a very big need, and we're trying to help more and more.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

You touched on something I wanted to pursue here. In my dubious youth I was an MLA in Ontario, and one of the things I participated in, in my city, was the establishment of a council of Canadian immigrants. We worked very hard. We tried to connect with the federal government with regard to the expertise these folks brought, and you touched on that a bit. In addition to the contacts, we were trying very hard to have the government recognize that these were people who knew the customs in their home countries. They knew how to make connections with regard to trade and they knew the basics, such as when you sat down with someone to talk about trade or business, there was a certain dynamic you had to understand.

I wonder if you could comment on that.

[Eric Major]

It's an evolving matter. I think as time progresses, and we get more and more globalized and these linkages grow.... I know for myself, 15 years in the business, my rolodex is growing. So I'm doing much better at being able to make these connections than I was ten years ago. A lot of these organizations are sprouting up and trying to make these linkages, whether it's for specific industries, engineers, whether it's for certain trades, and they're building and plowing ahead with this, but it's by no means an easy task. I think more has to be done on accreditation. We read a lot about those kinds of issues, and this is an ongoing challenge for any government, so there has to be more effort there. I think you've got to empower these organizations, both private and public, to build those networks, and not be afraid to talk to the outside. We get to know lawyers and accountants who could bridge these new immigrants into their new environment.

It's baby steps.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

You mentioned accreditation. Any comments or advice in that regard?

[Eric Major]

As far as I'm concerned, it's not what preoccupies the clients we're dealing with. So it's not something I come across very often, in terms of accreditation. We're aware this is an issue, but investors are very self-sustaining and find their way around.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

In my constituency office we deal with embassies all the time, and one of the things we found was that there is just not enough personnel in the embassies. They work very hard, but if there's a crisis of any kind, they're just inundated and they can't manage.

Do we need more people in the embassies, and do these immigration agents need more training and support to deal with the caseload?

[Eric Major]

I know Marc is probably going to want to add to this, but that's one of the main recommendations I've been making for the last six or seven years, not necessarily just to have more staff. I will be honest: it relates to this very narrow area called “investor” category. I'm not talking about general immigration. There is a very narrow category called investors.

I believe in the SWAT team approach. Take three or four individuals who know what a balance sheet looks like, what financial statements look like, and what the nature of business in these countries is, and have them flown over to Accra, to Shanghai, to Mexico, to São Paulo to plow through their inventory, because in fairness, a lot of these visa officers don't have that skill set. It's not that they can't learn it. In fact, I've talked to the CIC and there have been tremendous strides in terms of training and all that. But as it relates specifically to this area, my main recommendation today is to create a SWAT team, up until there is some medium- to long-term view to maybe creating centralized processing around it so that you have that skill set in one area. But I don't think you need to go that far, because you don't have the scale. It's a small program still. So to have three or four well-trained individuals who go out there and address what is their expertise is my own view.

I don't know if Marc wants to add to that.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you. We'll have to wait for another round.

Dr. Wong.

[Alice Wong, Conservative, Richmond, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And thank you, gentlemen, for coming to this committee.

I came from Hong Kong and my doctorate degree was in studying immigrant entrepreneurs. I definitely have followed 40 immigrant entrepreneurs for two years, so I know the challenges they have had and the skill sets they have had.

I want to comment on a couple of things. First of all, I definitely agree with Mr. Major's recommendation. What the government has been doing is moving files between offices. In fact, if you look at numbers, in 2004 in Hong Kong alone we had 3,459. But in 2008 the number rose to 11,244. What the government has done is exactly what you have just said, which is to transfer files between offices, and that's why the waiting time has been reduced. But of course we can still do better.

Looking at some of the economic impacts of the investor class immigrants, I know that Mr. Major is very familiar with the Vancouver area. Could you quote some actual examples of the economic impact of these investor immigrants?

[Eric Major]

I would love to. I have hundreds of them to give you.

Without naming names, a client from the U.K. migrated to the program, still very young, and just invested $5 million in essentially some manufacturing equipment out of Germany that was involved with the building wraps in relation to the Olympics. This chap migrated about six years ago. We put him in contact with the B.C. immigration people, with the entrepreneur and business immigration department there. They put him in contact with some key people they knew--a few bankers, a few lawyers, a few accountants. He got his skill set from his U.K. experience and brought it over to Canada and was involved in building wraps and did extremely well, thank you very much.

I can give you ten more of those kinds of examples, but the report was actually something.... We were hoping to get away from these anecdotal types of evidence and examples that I had always come to see some minister or some deputy minister to tell them about the great things these people are doing. So I applaud Mr. Paradis and Roger Ware's work on showing, beyond the specific examples that we see, the aggregate of the great contributions these people bring after they arrive here.

[Alice Wong, Conservative, Richmond, BC]

Thank you very much.

My next question is for the whole panel. If we can shorten the wait time then we will probably become more attractive. I also agree with what Mr. Major has just said about our program, that we are the victim of our own success, and that's why there is such a backlog we are facing right now.

What other suggestions or recommendations can you give us? For example, when we were talking to the Australian immigration people not long ago, they have two categories for sponsorship of parents, for example. If you pay more for the processing then they will be able to hire more personnel just to handle those. Do you think this might be an idea that might help?

[Eric Major]

It's a great idea.

I know that in principle it might be harder to implement than business people like me could appreciate. I think it exists within government already that you can get a passport in four weeks or you can get it in two weeks. If you want it in two days or four days, you'll pay more for it. I think we are now at the point where the government should be looking at this.

It's very difficult to sit down with a client who has great potential under this program and say to them, “We'll get back to you in four years”. Australia, New Zealand, even the U.K. or the U.S. will pick them up. Again, we've obviously done well, though. I'm not going to deny the great ten years that this program has generated. But we've been a victim of our success now, and we need to reposition.

In terms of recommendations, very briefly I would say reposition the program. It has to increase. It's time--it's eleven years old.

With regard to SWAT teams, get more commitment from the client up front. Get a deposit. That will slow things down. A deposit is a partial payment on what they will later need to provide to fulfill the investment, but slow the process down by getting more commitment up front.

Increase the targets. I think the report suggests that's a good idea. I still don't understand why this program has FD targets as opposed to visa targets. Every other category I've ever seen has targets in terms of visas. This program has targets in terms of final dispositions. I don't understand that. We think it's time to go to 3,000 visas.

Maybe I'll hand it over to you, Marc, if I am permitted.

[Marc Audet]

We can work on the Quebec model. I think the industrial program, the success for the past.... We're now at 25 years in Quebec. We used to receive fewer than 2,000 applications a year; now it's close to 5,000 applications a year under the Quebec program. Quebec is in the same position as you guys are. They are limited in manpower. They have to grow from inside, so they have to find another way to do the business.

They decided to change their model. For the past five or six years the banks have been more involved in the process. That's something that CIC is now looking at, saying to the guys from Desjardins or HSBC, “What can you do? Can you do part of the work to help us to speed up the case?” Maybe; they'll have to see.

Again, I think having specialized people.... Because you know when you receive a skilled worker file, it's like this, and an investor case is like that. During the day, you do five like this and one like that. That's the problem, I think. In Quebec they have specialized officers for the business class, and they travel around the world. They have interviews in Hong Kong, in Damascus, in Ankara. It's a kind of tiger team, a SWAT team. That's part of our suggestions. This is possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

That concludes the first round. I have a couple of questions before we move on to the second round.

Dr. Wong was raising the issue of temporary visas, and you commented on that. Can you tell us why you recommend that?

[Eric Major]

Sorry--you were saying that one of us commented on temporary visas?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Yes. I didn't hear that?

[Eric Major]

I....

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Well, if you didn't hear it, maybe I heard it.

Last Thursday we heard from a representative of the Australian government via video conferencing. That was one of the issues raised by the Australian authorities. The question was whether a faster initial temporary visa would make Canada's program more attractive.

[Eric Major]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Now I understand the angle of that question.

To be frank, it wouldn't apply for the investor category. Why? Because the investor category doesn't tie any terms and conditions to their visa when they arrive here.

I think it's a brilliant idea to bring somebody in on a work permit and keep them on a short leash. Tell them they will now have one, two, or three years to fulfill what they said you would do, which is either enter the regular force or start a business. Those are different categories, for which I think this Australian idea.... Frankly, B.C. has a program like that right now, which says “I'll let you in for two years. Your said you had this business plan. I want to see you implement it. If you do so, I'll graduate you to permanent residency.”

But that's not the reason we let investors in. We let them in because they have business experience and net worth, and they inject today $400,000 and maybe tomorrow $600,000 or $800,000 Canadian. Once they're here, we don't ask them to, but as this report shows, they contribute through these big expenditures.

Over to you, Marc.