Evidence of meeting #36 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was c-49.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Mark Watters  Assistant Deputy Minister, Chief Financial Officer, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Neil Yeates  Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Claudette Deschênes  Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Tilson

Good afternoon.

This is the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, meeting 36. Our orders of the day, pursuant to Standing Order 81(5), are to examine supplementary estimates (B) 2010-11, votes 1b, 5b, and 10b under Citizenship and Immigration, referred to the committee on Thursday, November 4, 2010.

We have with us, as our guest today, the Honourable Jason Kenney, the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism.

I won't introduce your colleagues, because I think we've met them all many times. If you have them speaking, you can introduce them, Minister.

Please go ahead.

December 6th, 2010 / 3:35 p.m.

Calgary Southeast Alberta

Conservative

Jason Kenney ConservativeMinister of Citizenship

Thank you, Mr. Chair and colleagues.

I am pleased today to present to the Committee my department's supplementary estimates (B) for fiscal year 2010-2011.

I think the supplementary estimates are self-explanatory, but if you have questions, of course, we are here to answer them. Perhaps in my opening remarks I can provide a brief summary of new developments within the Department, our operations and our policies.

Last March, as you all know, we introduced Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the Federal Courts Act, which received Royal Assent on June 29, 2010, of course after receiving the unanimous approval of both Houses of Parliament.

I would again like to thank my colleagues from all parties who worked on this.

This act will make Canada's refugee system more balanced, ensuring quicker protection for those who need it and quicker removals of those who don't. It will help deter those who would seek to abuse our immigration and refugee protection systems.

As part of these changes, Canada will also increase the number of resettled refugees by 20%, or 2,500 refugees per year. This includes 2,000 more spots in the private sponsorship program and 500 more government-assisted refugees. In addition, we will increase funding to the refugee assistance program. We've already started that work. This will give the refugees we resettle the support they need to begin their lives in Canada.

To promote these increases, I travelled across the country this summer to encourage individuals and organizations to become private sponsors, to become more involved in a revitalization of the private sponsorship refugee program. In particular, I urged them to become part of our humanitarian tradition by helping to provide a new beginning for victims of violence and persecution around the world, such as those forced to flee the cruelty and brutality of the Ahmadinejad regime in Iran and religious persecution in Iraq.

I should also mention that we've begun--or more than begun, we're well into--the hard work of implementation of the Balanced Refugee Reform Act. In fact, I've appointed, I believe, all of the additional IRB decision-makers for the refugee protection division who are necessary as part of our commitment to begin the process of backlog reduction.

Canada remains committed to protecting those who are most vulnerable. The Government of Canada is equally committed to upholding our laws and to protecting the integrity of our immigration and refugee systems.

That's why we've introduced legislation to crack down on crooked immigration consultants who promote fraud in our immigration program and victimize those who dream of immigrating to this great country.

I'd like to acknowledge Ms. Chow's advocacy that this initiative had to be twinned with our efforts on refugee reform.

As was the case with Bill C-11, this spirit of compromise and cooperation surrounding Bill C-35 has spoken, I think, very well to all parliamentarians on this committee.

We also introduced legislation that would strengthen the value of Canadian citizenship by making it easier to lose citizenship if it is improperly obtained, and we hope to begin debate upon second reading in the House in the near future.

But for Canadian citizenship to be meaningful, it also is essential that new and established Canadians alike share a common understanding of our rights and responsibilities, our institutions, our democratic traditions, and our history. That's why, just over a year ago, I was proud to launch Discover Canada: The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship, our popular new citizenship study guide, which is required reading for anyone seeking to become a Canadian citizen. In fact, the demands for the publication and tens of thousands of downloads from the website, as well as the very positive feedback, have been extraordinary.

This past March, my department began administering a new citizenship test based on Discover Canada. We expect new citizens to know about our country, so we've made the material and guide more comprehensive in scope. We strongly encourage citizenship applicants who want to do well on the test to study the new guide and familiarize themselves with their new country's history, symbols, values, and institutions.

To become a Canadian citizen, you also need to have knowledge of English or French. That obligation is set out in the Citizenship Act. Discover Canada is available as an audio version to help applicants who are still learning English or French study.

And since 2006, we have tripled funding to settlement services, including free language classes, after it had been previously frozen for years. That's meant an additional $1.4 billion over five years to enhance services that help newcomers integrate into Canadian society.

While the government helps immigrants integrate into our society, including through the provision of language training, we expect newcomers to take advantage of this support. What concerns me is that only about 25% of newcomers who qualify for free language classes have enrolled in federally funded classes. To ensure that all immigrants are able to fully integrate and participate in society, this is a number that we would like to see increase.

I'm very pleased to report today that we are well on our way to achieving this goal, as a result, in part, of a pilot project that we launched last fall, where we mailed language training vouchers to 2,000 randomly selected permanent residents. The preliminary results of the vouchers show that more than twice the number of immigrants who received vouchers enrolled in language classes than those who did not. We'll being seeing the final results of our assessment in the spring, and if they continue to be positive, we'll look at options to expand this approach.

We've also updated the multiculturalism program's objectives, placing a much greater emphasis on integration. Through its new objectives, the program will help build an integrated, socially cohesive society, and improve the responsiveness of institutions to the needs of a diverse population.

The Government is committed to improving the Temporary Foreign Worker Program to protect foreign workers and live-in caregivers from potential abuse and exploitation.

To this end, we proposed improvements to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program, including penalties for employers who fail in their commitments to their employees.

We also made changes to the live-in caregiver program to better protect these workers and make it easier and faster for them and their families to obtain permanent residency in Canada.

In addition, Mr. Chair, we have introduced important legislative amendments to Canada's immigration laws, which would help protect vulnerable foreign workers, such as exotic dancers, who could be victims of exploitation or human trafficking.

The government is committed to maintaining our tradition of welcoming newcomers from around the world, Mr. Chairman. In fact, it's likely that this year, we will see the largest number of newcomers landing in Canada as permanent residents in more than five decades. In 2011 we intend to welcome between 240,000 and 265,000 permanent residents. I understand my officials were before you last week to discuss the planned levels.

The Government of Canada also remains committed to using immigration in a way that best serves our economic needs.

That's why I'm pleased that Canada was able to lift the visa requirement for travellers with ordinary Taiwan passports. This is something we announced, I believe, just a week ago. This is the eighth visa that we've lifted since 2006.

As you know, I spent time in September visiting our principal immigration source countries—India, China, and the Philippines—as well as having discussions with my colleagues in Europe and Australia. We focused on working together to combat abuse of our immigration system, and human smuggling and trafficking.

We are taking steps to address this challenge. Regulatory changes have been introduced to clarify the authority of the government to refuse applicants on the basis of marriages of convenience. The changes provide visa officers with a better tool to prevent people who have entered into phony marriages from undermining the integrity of our system.

This fall I also held a series of cross-country town hall meetings on the issue of phony marriages. I want to personally hear people's stories, as well as their opinions and ideas about how to best address the issue. While we obviously want to keep the doors open for legitimate spouses, we also want to make sure the doors are not open for those who would break our laws and exploit Canadians.

Mr. Chair, in closing, let me just address human smuggling. This represents an assault on our country's borders and generosity. It clogs our immigration system by diverting resources away from other areas where they ought to be focused. That's why our law enforcement agencies need the tools to be able to combat human smuggling, whether on a small or large scale. Bill C-49, an act Preventing Human Smugglers from Abusing Canada's Immigration System, will enable us to crack down on the despicable human smugglers who prey on vulnerable migrants.

Canadians expect strong actions, but actions that are also balanced with our humanitarian and legal obligations. We believe Bill C-49 achieves that objective.

In closing, these are just some of the ways we are working to make immigration more responsive to our economy, and make our refugee programs more fair and efficient.

Thank you for this opportunity to address the Committee, and I would be happy to respond to your questions.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Tilson

Thank you.

Mr. Trudeau.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC

Thank you, Chair.

Minister, I think I'd like to start with some questions around the language instruction for newcomers to Canada, the LINC program. In 2008-09 we had roughly $274 million planned, authority for $254 million, but the government only spent $172 million; so a third of the funding actually lapsed during the 2008-09 year. However, this year, the only reference—because you're no longer detailing spending for LINC specifically—we're showing an increase in newcomers receiving language training of 792 people, up 1.04%.

My question is how much did you plan to spend this year on the LINC program and how much was actually spent, if it's up 1.04% but we had a third funding lapse last time?

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB

First of all, Mr. Chairman, when our government came to office the total funding for settlement services in Canada was about $180 million per year. We've seen that more than triple to over $650 million. Most of that is dedicated to language instruction for newcomers to Canada. The increase in funding was so steep that we found an inability to enter into contribution agreements that met the legal criteria of the terms and conditions of the program.

Mr. Trudeau, you may recall that about 10 years ago there was a report from the Auditor General about tens of millions of dollars in grants and contributions from HRSDC to service delivery organizations, including some that deliver LINC, and it was found there was a lack of accountability, transparency, reporting, and outcome measurement. It caused quite a brouhaha and the previous Liberal government at the time cracked down with tighter regulations on grants and contributions.

Those regulations, in a sense, handcuffed the department so that we were limited in entering into contribution agreements unless we were absolutely certain that the terms and conditions would be met. So quite frankly, it was an administrative problem. Put it this way: so much money surged into the system that there was not a capacity to be able to deliver the services in accordance with the Gs and the Cs.

But I do share your concern. You're quite right to point out that there was only a very modest increase in enrolment in LINC classes. I think from 2006 to 2008 we went from about 48,000 to 52,000 enrollees in LINC classes. So for me, if you triple funding and you see only about a 10% increase, there's a problem. We're trying to address that through more innovative ways of delivering the service, such as the voucher program.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC

My question then is why are you no longer letting Canadians see how much is being spent on language training? You mentioned a number of times throughout your presentation how important language training was for passing the tests, for integration, for success. We're no longer seeing exactly what the expenditure is on the LINC program; it's lumped into settlement in general.

I was wondering if you would agree to table with the committee the planned spending for LINC in 2009-10 and what was the actual money spent on LINC.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB

Absolutely...[Inaudible--Editor]...with just one point of explanation. Our experience with this huge increase in funding was that it didn't make a lot of sense to be parcelling it out into silos, the different settlement programs, since most of the service provider organizations are delivering a bundle of services. Often the same staff will be working on Host and LINC and job search skills and so forth.

What we've done in modernizing the delivery of settlement services is to bundle them together. So it's a little more difficult to dig out exactly how much is allocated to LINC, but we'll give you those numbers.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC

As you pointed out, language is so important in terms of learning that it would be important information for us to have, please. Could we get an idea of when? Would you table that for us fairly shortly?

Within a week?

Thank you very much.

My other question is something you referred to as one of the hot buttons these days around Bill C-49. Is there a difference for you between our refugee process and our immigration system?

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB

Yes.

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC

Perhaps you could explain to why, or in which way human smugglers....

Look at the short title of Bill C-49, which talks about human smugglers abusing our immigration system; I think the concern is that they're abusing our refugee process. Human smugglers don't actually smuggle immigrants, in any way, shape, or form. They're asylum seekers.

So why the short title, Preventing Human Smugglers from Abusing Canada's Immigration System Act, which is patently false?

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB

I would not accept the premise of your question, Mr. Trudeau. I would contend that smugglers provide an illegal service for a fee, as opposed to traffickers, who bring people against their will. Yes, some of their customers may be asylum seekers, some of whom will presumably be false asylum seekers and some of whom will be bona fide refugees, but some may also be economic migrants.

I bring you the example of the Fujian vessels, five vessels that arrived in Canada in 1999 and 2000. All evidence is they were intending to transit through Canada to work illegally in the United States and weren't terribly interested in making asylum claims. The proof of that is as soon as they lost at first instance at the IRB, they all willingly got on planes and went back home rather than appealing.

I would point out, with respect to Tamil customers for the smuggling syndicates, CBC did a report about a month ago in Chennai, India, where Tamils had paid smuggling syndicates thousands of dollars to come to Canada illegally and they said that it was for economic reasons.

So there's a mix of motives for customers.

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Tilson

Thank you.

Monsieur St-Cyr.

3:50 p.m.

Bloc

Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC

Before moving on to my questions, I am just going to add an aside, so as not to break the rhythm of what Mr. Trudeau has just said.

Will you admit, though, that in Bill C-49, all the measures proposed relate to refugees; there isn't a single one that relates to immigration?

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB

I think that in the human smuggling industry we have a mix of...

3:50 p.m.

Bloc

Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC

In Bill C-49, [Inaudible--Editor].

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB

We are proposing tools for police and border security agencies to combat human smugglers, whether their passengers be bona fide refugees, bogus refugees or illegal economic immigrants. I think there is a mix.

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Tilson

The meeting is suspended for 30 seconds.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Tilson

There are still problems. We'll have to muddle through it.

After each person speaks, you have to wait. There's going to have to be a pause, or else it just won't work.

That's going to be challenging for these guys, because they'll want to get....

Mr. St-Cyr, you're back on.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB

Mr. Chair, the problem with smugglers has been more serious since the arrival of the MV Sun Sea last August. Obviously, the human smugglers problem has always been there in the background of immigration policies in Canada. However, it is clear to the government, and clearer still to the general public in Canada, that we have to have the tools to combat the threats presented by human smuggling rings because they are a threat to the integrity of our system.

I would remind you that as Minister of Immigration, I have responsibility for maintaining public support for our immigration and refugee protection systems. Since the arrival of the MV Sun Sea, we have seen a decline of about 20% in support for legal immigration in public opinion surveys. That is why I think we have to protect public confidence in our system. We therefore have to take action, and that is what we have done in Bill C-49.

3:55 p.m.

Bloc

Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC

You say it took the arrival of a boat this summer for you, the four dedicated and highly competent people with you and the entire Department to realize that the balanced reform of this spring was insufficient to meet the demand. And yet there is currently a problem with that reform. It will take another two years for it to be implemented, to be applied.

It seems to me that you have all the tools you need there to handle this problem. It is somewhat paradoxical to note that four months later, because of the arrival of one boat, you are suddenly saying that everything you've done isn't sufficient.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB

I think that Bill C-11 was a good comprehensive reform for the problems associated with the refugee protection system, but it was not sufficient to deal with the particular threats from the big human smuggling rings.

We need to have access to various tools. For example, in the area of visas, there has been a decline since 2008 in the number of refugee protection claims filed in Canada: from 38,000 to about 19,000, this year, and that is largely because of the visa requirement instituted in June 2008.

So there is not just one solution to the problems we're facing. Yes, a more efficient, speedier system, like the one we adopted in one sitting, is useful, as a general rule. But I don't think it is necessarily useful for the people who are prepared to pay $50,000 to come to Canada illegally.

[Inaudible--Editor] that these people are necessarily going to claim refugee protection.

As I said, in terms of the arrival of the Fujian vessels 10 years ago, they weren't really people looking for refugee protection, they were clearly actually people looking for jobs.

4 p.m.

Bloc

Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC

We could debate that at length. There is one thing I don't understand. If you are not even persuaded that the problem is refugees, why has your colleague at Public Safety only included measures relating to the part of the IRPA dealing with refugees? Clearly it is refugees who are targeted; it isn't even the smugglers? There are a few provisions at the end, maybe three, maybe fewer, that relate to minimum sentences. We could debate it at length. Nonetheless, the nub of Bill C-49 does not target smugglers or immigrants, it clearly targets refugees who might arrive in these boats.

The human smuggler who is paid to do the job, who brings people to Canada illegally, as you contend, how does it punish them, for the person they bring to Canada to be imprisoned for no reason and with no review of their case for a year? That doesn't take anything away from that person.

4 p.m.

Conservative

Jason Kenney Conservative Calgary Southeast, AB

First, immigration detention is not imprisonment. In fact, it was the person's choice to settle in Canada and it is also their choice to leave the country, if they want, during the time they are in detention.

Second, in nearly all liberal democracies there is an immigration detention system that is much more stringent than what we are proposing in this bill. In the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and a number of countries in Western Europe, they have to be kept in an immigration detention centre until final determination of their case.

We are proposing this kind of tool solely for people who arrive in big waves. There are certain practical realities in that case. For example, when 500 people arrive, the border and police agencies have to be able to identify the passengers. When immigrants arrive in large numbers it is very difficult in practical terms. That is why we need a longer detention period. It allows the officers to identify who has arrived illegally.

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Tilson

Thank you.

We'll go to Ms. Chow.

4 p.m.

NDP

Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON

Holiday season: families want to be together, especially parents with their grandkids, and new immigrants get lonely; they want their parents here.

I saw the backlog list. I think Mr. Yeates told me, and I confirmed the number, that there are 145,000 parents waiting. For Beijing, you have to wait at least five years for parents to come. There are 7,000 from Beijing who are waiting. From New Delhi it is 13,000, and that's a six- or seven-year wait. This is from the various papers that have been given to us in the past.

So if you're looking at applying to sponsor your parents, it's five to eight years before they can come to Canada. The target is only about 13,000 a year. That means the backlog will just grow.

I've met with some of those sponsoring Canadians here, and they've said, “You know, if my parents were from Paris, it would take about a year at most, but they're from Beijing, so it will take about five to six years. That's just not fair.” That is the queue, if you're talking about queue: people are really desperate in terms of the number of years they have to wait for their parents to come.

Is there any way to increase the targets for both Beijing and New Delhi--because that is mostly where the backlog is--and the overall targets in your annual plan for parents? I know you increased it for spouses, which is good, but what about parents?