Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Nov. 29th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

This is the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, meeting number 34, on Monday, November 29, 2010. The orders of the day are pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), a study of the 2010 fall report of the Auditor General of Canada, chapter 3, “Service Delivery at the Department of the Citizenship and Immigration Canada”. The second hour will be pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), the annual report to Parliament on immigration, 2010, referred to the committee on Monday, November 1, 2010.

We have some guests with us today, some witnesses on the Auditor General's report. I understand the Auditor General is out of the country or at least unavailable. We have Sylvain Ricard, who is the assistant auditor general, and Glenn Wheeler, who is the principal. Welcome to you.

Also at the table are officials from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration.

My understanding, Monsieur Ricard, is that you will give a short presentation. Then we will open it up for questions, which could include officials from the department.

Oh, they're going to do one, too. Okay. Well, then I will continue introducing you.

We have Neil Yeates, the deputy minister, Claudette Deschênes, the assistant deputy minister of operations, and Les Linklater, the assistant deputy minister, strategic and program policy.

So you're going to make a presentation, too. Well, that's good.

Monsieur Ricard, the floor is yours.

[Sylvain Ricard, Assistant Auditor General, Office of the Auditor General of Canada]

Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to discuss chapter 3 of our 2010 fall report, service delivery. Joining me at the table is Glenn Wheeler, Principal, who was responsible for the audit.

All Canadians require the services of the federal government at one time or another, and research indicates that they expect high quality service. At the same time, the government must balance clients' needs with policy requirements and available resources.

Our audit looked at the practices used by three organizations —Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, and the Canada Revenue Agency —to set their service standards, monitor and report on their service performance, and act on this information to improve service quality.

We found that two organizations we examined, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada and the Canada Revenue Agency, have adequate practices in place to manage their service delivery, while a third, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, has yet to establish service standards for some of its major programs. We appreciate that the committee would like to focus today on the portion of the audit that examines Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

The department has been working to develop service standards since 2007. In April 2010 the department published a preliminary set of service standards and associated targets for four business signs. This set of standards is very limited, considering that the department provides more than 35 different services. There are no standards for some major services, for example, the citizenship program.

Without a complete set of standards, the department cannot comprehensively evaluate its service performance and may not be able to ensure a consistent level of service to its clients. In the absence of standards, the department was using operational data such as intake, output, processing time, and inventories to provide some indication of performance.

We recommend that the department ensure that all channels of communication provide consistent information on the time it takes to process applications for citizenship and requests for citizenship certificates, that it establish and communicate a comprehensive set of service standards for all key services it delivers, that it monitor and report on its service performance against these standards, and that it collect and analyze client feedback and complaints to identify systemic service issues.

The department has developed an action plan in response to our recommendation. In particular, we note that it plans to develop a comprehensive set of service standards and to begin reporting externally on them by spring 2013.

Mr. Chair, this concludes my opening remarks. We would be pleased to answer any questions. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Yes, I know. I'm awake.

That's a record speech, sir. Thank you very much.

Mr. Yeates.

[Neil Yeates, Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

Good morning, Mr. Chair, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Neil Yeates and I am Deputy Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

I'm accompanied by Claudette Deschênes and Les Linklater.

I would like to thank the committee for inviting me to speak today on the findings of chapter 3 in the Auditor General's report.

First, simply to make it clear, the department does agree with the Auditor General's recommendations related to adopting service standards and more generally improving service delivery. As the Auditor General observed in her report, the department has already taken some steps to improve our services to the public, both in Canada and overseas. But I'd also like to take this opportunity to point out to the committee that it is challenging for CIC to introduce timely service standards for business lines where we have no control over intake.

Our immigration plan sets limits on how many applications we will process in a year; however, in many immigration streams there is no limit on the number of people who can apply. We receive high volumes of applications, processing capacity is limited, and the levels plan determines, ultimately, how many people can be admitted each year. This can result in long delays while cases wait for active processing and it makes it difficult to set timely service standards.

I would also like to note that each case is processed on an individual basis in full accordance with the law. In order to ensure applications are processed accurately and fairly, this can take longer in some cases. Errors or incomplete information in forms, missing information, or other inconsistencies can cause further delays in processing a case. Despite these challenges, CIC remains committed to improving its services to applicants and our processing times. Indeed, we've made some recent progress.

This year, CIC piloted initiatives that have shortened processing times for business visitors and many students through the business express program and the student partners program. It also accelerated processing of sponsorship applications from Canadian citizens and permanent residents who had close family members who were significantly affected by the earthquake in Haiti. As well, the global case management system, GCMS, is currently being rolled out overseas, and it will be implemented in all overseas missions by the end of March 2011. This will improve CIC's processing efficiencies, since staff will have access to an applicant's information in one integrated system.

In addition to improving our processing times, we have expanded our online services and increased the use of online applications, in order to provide more accessible and efficient services.

Our goal is to make it easier for people to apply online, by helping applicants overcome the often confusing information overload that may lead some to seek the services of an immigration consultant.

Expanding our online services has significantly improved the application process by providing more accessible and efficient services, and CIC intends to make all types of applications available online in the future. The department is also developing video tutorials that provide step-by-step instructions on completing application forms. We expect these videos will help increase the efficiency in processing applications, since they will help reduce the number of errors on the forms.

Our online services are now also available on a mobile site. This enables applicants to access our services whenever they are on the move, wherever they are in the world, and whenever is most convenient for them. Indeed, we are committed to establishing an online relationship between applicants and CIC through the use of electronic accounts, application forms, and status updates. This means we would be available 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

The department has also entered the foray of social media to further engage applicants and the broader public. Through Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, we've begun an ongoing dialogue with the public about our policies and programs. We are also publishing the most current processing times on the CIC website for applications in all immigration categories. This provides applicants with access to the most accurate and timely information available.

Despite making information more easily accessible for applicants, we understand that members of Parliament are often approached by their constituents for information on the status of their application. And CIC is looking to improve its immigration reference document intended specifically for senators and MPs.

By engaging applicants in an online relationship, CIC is empowering applicants and we are also improving our online services in other ways. For example, we are developing an interactive online tool that matches individuals with the immigration option that best suits them.

Based on the recommendations from the OAG's report, CIC also began work this year to improve our collection and analysis of feedback and complaints from applicants, and through our website we've begun online consultations on our current service standards to understand applicants' perceptions of these and the CIC's service declaration. We will also launch a survey of applicants by the end of this fiscal year, and the results should be available next year.

The results will inform future work on improving our service standards and setting new ones. We plan to report on these results publicly.

This year we introduced service declaration and service standards for four services, and we will implement a second phase of service standards on April 1, 2011. The second phase will incorporate the lessons learned so far, together with feedback from applicants from the implementation of phase 1 on April 1, 2010.

These are some of the ways we are working to improve service and address the Auditor General's recommendations. Ultimately, we aim to improve service standards for all of our key business lines.

I would be happy to respond to any questions you may have.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Mr. Yeates.

Mr. Trudeau.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Thank you, Chair.

In my riding, I get approached, as many MPs do, by an awful lot of people who are unable to find out where their application is and how it's being processed. I explain to them that the reason they haven't heard back from CIC, or from the embassy, is that nothing has changed in their file. I usually add that if CIC had someone there to answer all the letters and requests for information that are sent in, there would be fewer people working on their files.

That sort of reflection leads me to wonder, and hopefully the people from the Auditor General's office can inform me, if not the others.... I like the idea of service standards. Who wouldn't want to make sure that Canadians and people interacting with the Government of Canada are getting the best quality of service possible? But given that there isn't any significant extra funding for improving service standards, where is the line between...? Are we actually going to improve service delivery? Will we be processing people's applications quicker by investing in service standards? That's what I'd like to hear from you all. Are we making things better for applicants? Will it be faster? Will it be more efficient for them once we have a better quality of engagement?

[Sylvain Ricard]

The direct answer is that standards don't directly improve the service itself. It's a means of measuring your service level against the target you're aiming to achieve. Far be it from me to signal a need for more funding or to say what should be the service level, but we believe it's important to reach a conclusion about funding. We believe it's important for an organization to decide on the level of service they want to deliver and then monitor the service to identify how things are going.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Much of the emphasis is on providing accurate information to people. Instead of thinking that they're going to have their spouse here within 12 months, they realize it's going to be 20 months, or whatever the number is. Even though the emphasis is on telling them that it's going to take them 20 months, so they actually have the right expectations, isn't there a sense that they might be pleased to know how long it's going to take, theoretically, except they'll be so disappointed that it's going to take closer to two years to have their spouse come over that knowing that it's actually 20 months isn't going to help? We can talk about great service performance, under these metrics, and yet not talk about actually delivering what is within people's expectations of how long it should take to sponsor a loved one to come over.

Maybe CIC could respond to that.

Please go first, Mr. Wheeler.

[Glenn Wheeler, Principal, Office of the Auditor General of Canada]

Mr. Chair, I'll start, and then we'll turn it over to CIC.

As Mr. Ricard mentioned, the act of establishing service standards has several benefits, including increased accountability and transparency. We note this in several places in our chapter. It gives all stakeholders—the department, Canadians, new Canadians, members of Parliament—a better sense of what processing times are. Measuring performance can give the department a sense of where it is and where improvements can be made. So this information is of paramount importance to the department in managing its program.

Perhaps the department would like to respond as well.

[Neil Yeates]

I think that question hits the dilemma right on the head. We've been publishing processing times for many years. I think for most of the clients we deal with, that probably is the key metric as far as they're concerned. It's not the only one. We have qualitative dimensions of service standards in terms of how quickly we might respond to somebody, say in a call centre, in terms of answering the phone, or the nature of the interactions with our staff and whether they are professional, courteous, respectful, and those kinds of things. Those are all important, but I think at the end of the day, most of the public are most concerned about how long it's going to take their application to be processed. I think it's quite correct to have a standard per se, which for us is mostly going to deal with our processing times.

I would just say to the committee, Chair, that as we embark on this process of developing service standards for all of our business lines, a lot of that's going to be about translating our processing times into a service standard, because we are bound by the levels plan and other things.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

It's an important thing, and I absolutely agree with the metrics and with having service standards and measurables so we can see how a department is doing and how effectively it's delivering its services. But it concerns me that--I assume there haven't been significant amounts of new funding to the department in order to implement these new service performance standards. Is that true?

[Neil Yeates]

Chair, if I may, we haven't received new funding for service standards per se, but we do have additional resources that are being used for federal skilled workers under the action plan for faster immigration. It has had that effect actually. Resources were put in to reduce the backlog of applications we had. We've seen a pretty dramatic improvement, actually, a big reduction in the backlog for federal skilled workers. It peaked at about 640,000 cases, and it's about 340,000 now, so it's gone down quite dramatically. For the new cases that are coming in, we're able to respond within that six- to twelve- month period, which we think is a reasonable time in which to do it. That has come about essentially through applying controls on the front end of the application process. It gives us a more manageable group of applications to deal with.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

You've done that by returning a whole bunch of applications that didn't qualify, rather than processing them. I think that's a question I will actually have in the second hour.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I'm afraid it's Monsieur St-Cyr now. Your time is up.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

I mean in the second half of this.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I know, but your time is up now.

Monsieur St-Cyr.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you to all of you for being here today.

In your report, as far as the audit is concerned, you raised the issue of consistency of service and the information which is provided, whether that information is provided online, on the phone, or by letter. I could not find any detailed information on whether you examined the consistency of services provided abroad. You talked about the various service points throughout the world.

As members of Parliament, we have several concerns, including this one: depending on the embassy we deal with in a given country, the information we are given will be more or less transparent, and the ease, speed and quality might vary, as well as the quality of the service we receive.

Is this simply a false perception on the part of members of Parliament? In other words, it seems that the service we receive varies greatly from one CIC office to the next, depending on where it is located. Perhaps you have also looked at this issue and concluded that the services provided throughout the world are uneven.

[Sylvain Ricard]

No. I will clarify the paragraph you are referring to. What we were simply trying to say in this paragraph is that, at a certain point, given the means of communication the department had, the information provided on a same subject was not consistent. It's not that we assessed or measured these things; it was simply a fact. If people sent information by letter or online, they were not afforded the same response time. This technical problem was solved, I believe, or it is in the process of being solved.

What I mean to say by this is that the purpose of our audit was simply to see whether there was a mechanism to establish service targets. After that, the department would measure its service performance. But, in our case, we did not attempt to assess a service performance.

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

You do not conduct the assessment, but you see whether the department is doing so.

[Sylvain Ricard]

Exactly.

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

In that case, I will ask my question again.

To your knowledge, has the department assessed the quality and consistency of the services it provides elsewhere throughout the world?

[Glenn Wheeler]

As Mr. Ricard mentioned, our audit didn't specifically look at that particular thing. We looked at the extent to which the department identified service standards for its major programs and services at the corporate level.

The one program we looked at in a bit more detail was the citizenship--

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

And that is done completely in Canada, of course. I understand. In that case, I will take the opportunity to put the question to the officials from CIC.

Do you assess the consistency of the services you provide in various countries throughout the world? The perception the people who work in MPs' offices have is that the quality of services varies greatly from one embassy to the next. Is that justified?

[Neil Yeates]

Mr. Chairman, there is no doubt that we face challenges once in a while, including problems with certain embassies in certain missions. These challenges vary all the time.

On how we monitor that, we look at processing times across missions and lines of business. One of our dilemmas is to what extent we can expect processing times or a service standard to be the same in each mission around the world. It is a big challenge in the business we do, given the circumstances we face, the number of countries a particular mission may be serving, and the different logistical and other issues that may exist in that region of the world.

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

Is there any possibility that we increase the amount of processing done in Canada? Does everything which is currently done abroad have to be done over there, at the risk of having inconsistency in service standards throughout our missions? Could we not just do most of the processing in Canada, which would guarantee a certain stability in the services we provide?